From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [xfs] 68a9f5e700: aim7.jobs-per-min -13.6% regression
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:02:50 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160816220250.GI16044@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwmRPuhLLqN8D-3pcbkqoC05t=1dtnsv8k074uD7QNxBg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10010 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 06:51:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Anyway, including the direct reclaim call paths gets
> __remove_mapping() a bit higher, and _raw_spin_lock_irqsave climbs to
> 0.26%. But perhaps more importlantly, looking at what __remove_mapping
> actually *does* (apart from the spinlock) gives us:
>
> - inside remove_mapping itself (0.11% on its own - flat cost, no
> child accounting)
>
> 48.50 │ lock cmpxchg %edx,0x1c(%rbx)
>
> so that's about 0.05%
>
> - 0.40% __delete_from_page_cache (0.22%
> radix_tree_replace_clear_tags, 0.13%__radix_tree_lookup)
>
> - 0.06% workingset_eviction()
>
> so I'm not actually seeing anything *new* expensive in there. The
> __delete_from_page_cache() overhead may have changed a bit with the
> tagged tree changes, but this doesn't look like memcg.
>
> But we clearly have very different situations.
>
> What does your profile show for when you actually dig into
> __remove_mapping() itself?, Looking at your flat profile, I'm assuming
> you get
- 22.26% 0.93% [kernel] [k] __remove_mapping
- 3.86% __remove_mapping
- 18.35% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
__pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
1.32% __delete_from_page_cache
- 0.92% _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
__raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock
And the instruction level profile:
.....
� xor %ecx,%ecx
� mov %rax,%r15
0.39 � mov $0x2,%eax
� lock cmpxchg %ecx,0x1c(%rbx)
32.56 � cmp $0x2,%eax
� � jne 12e
� mov 0x20(%rbx),%rax
� lea -0x1(%rax),%rdx
0.39 � test $0x1,%al
� cmove %rbx,%rdx
� mov (%rdx),%rax
0.39 � test $0x10,%al
� � jne 127
� mov (%rbx),%rcx
� shr $0xf,%rcx
� and $0x1,%ecx
� � jne 14a
� mov 0x68(%r14),%rax
36.03 � xor %esi,%esi
� test %r13b,%r13b
� mov 0x50(%rax),%rdx
1.16 � � jne e8
0.96 � a9: mov %rbx,%rdi
.....
Indicates most time on the cmpxchg for the page ref followed by the
grabbing on the ->freepage op vector:
freepage = mapping->a_ops->freepage;
> I come back to wondering whether maybe you're hitting some PV-lock problem.
>
> I know queued_spin_lock_slowpath() is ok. I'm not entirely sure
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() is.
It's the same code AFAICT, except the pv version jumps straight to
the "queue" case.
> So I'd love to see you try the non-PV case, but I also think it might
> be interesting to see what the instruction profile for
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() itself is. They share a lot of code
> (there's some interesting #include games going on to make
> queued_spin_lock_slowpath() actually *be*
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() with some magic hooks), but there
> might be issues.
0.03 � data16 data16 data16 xchg %ax,%ax
� push %rbp
0.00 � mov %rsp,%rbp
0.01 � push %r15
� push %r14
� push %r13
0.01 � push %r12
� mov $0x18740,%r12
� push %rbx
� mov %rdi,%rbx
� sub $0x10,%rsp
� add %gs:0x7ef0d0e0(%rip),%r12
� movslq 0xc(%r12),%rax
0.02 � mov %gs:0x7ef0d0db(%rip),%r15d
� add $0x1,%r15d
� shl $0x12,%r15d
� lea 0x1(%rax),%edx
0.01 � mov %edx,0xc(%r12)
� mov %eax,%edx
� shl $0x4,%rax
� add %rax,%r12
� shl $0x10,%edx
� movq $0x0,(%r12)
0.02 � or %edx,%r15d
� mov %gs:0x7ef0d0ad(%rip),%eax
0.00 � movl $0x0,0x8(%r12)
0.01 � mov %eax,0x40(%r12)
� movb $0x0,0x44(%r12)
� mov (%rdi),%eax
0.88 � test %ax,%ax
� � jne 8f
0.02 � mov $0x1,%edx
� lock cmpxchg %dl,(%rdi)
0.38 � test %al,%al
� � je 14a
0.02 � 8f: mov %r15d,%eax
� shr $0x10,%eax
� xchg %ax,0x2(%rbx)
2.07 � shl $0x10,%eax
� test %eax,%eax
� � jne 171
� movq $0x0,-0x30(%rbp)
0.02 � ac: movzbl 0x44(%r12),%eax
0.97 � mov $0x1,%r13d
� mov $0x100,%r14d
� cmp $0x2,%al
� sete %al
� movzbl %al,%eax
� mov %rax,-0x38(%rbp)
0.00 � ca: movb $0x0,0x44(%r12)
0.00 � mov $0x8000,%edx
� movb $0x1,0x1(%rbx)
� � jmp e6
0.04 � db: pause
8.04 � sub $0x1,%edx
� � je 229
� e6: movzbl (%rbx),%eax
7.54 � test %al,%al
� � jne db
0.10 � mov %r14d,%eax
0.06 � lock cmpxchg %r13w,(%rbx)
2.93 ? cmp $0x100,%ax
� � jne db
� fc: mov (%rbx),%edx
0.37 � mov $0x1,%ecx
� or $0x1,%edx
� � jmp 114
0.01 �108: mov %edx,%eax
� lock cmpxchg %ecx,(%rbx)
0.26 � cmp %edx,%eax
� � je 14a
� mov %eax,%edx
�114: mov %edx,%eax
0.00 � xor %ax,%ax
� cmp %r15d,%eax
� � je 108
0.01 � cmpq $0x0,-0x30(%rbp)
? movb $0x1,(%rbx)
� � je 251
�12c: mov -0x30(%rbp),%rsi
0.01 � mov $0x1,%eax
� mov $0x2,%edx
� movl $0x1,0x8(%rsi)
0.11 � lock cmpxchg %dl,0x44(%rsi)
2.34 � cmp $0x1,%al
� � je 160
�14a: decl %gs:0x7ef1b5bb(%rip)
0.02 � add $0x10,%rsp
� pop %rbx
� pop %r12
0.00 � pop %r13
� pop %r14
� pop %r15
� pop %rbp
� � retq
�160: mov -0x30(%rbp),%rsi
� movb $0x3,(%rbx)
� mov %rbx,%rdi
� callq 0xffffffff810fcf90
� � jmp 14a
�171: lea 0x44(%r12),%r14
� mov %rax,%r13
� shr $0x12,%eax
� shr $0xc,%r13
� sub $0x1,%eax
� and $0x30,%r13d
� cltq
� add $0x18740,%r13
? add -0x7d8164c0(,%rax,8),%r13
0.03 � mov %r12,0x0(%r13)
0.38 �19c: mov $0x8000,%eax
� � jmp 1b7
0.04 �1a3: test %al,%al
� � jne 1b0
� movzbl 0x44(%r13),%edx
1.66 � test %dl,%dl
� � jne 1f1
1.75 �1b0: pause
64.57 � sub $0x1
0.04 � � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
0.03 � � test %eax,%eax
� �� jne 1d4
�1c9:� pause
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� � test %eax,%eax
� �� je 1c9
�1d4:� mov (%r12),%rax
� � test %rax,%rax
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
0.05 � �� je ac
� � mov -0x30(%rbp),%rax
� � prefet (%rax)
0.25 � �� jmpq ac
�1f1:� mov $0x1,%eax
� � xchg %al,0x44(%r12)
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� � test %eax,%eax
� �� jne 213
� � mov %r14,%rdi
� � mov $0x1,%esi
� � callq 0xffffffff8109f7a0
� � xchg %ax,%ax
�213:� mov $0x1,%eax
� � xor %edi,%edi
� � lock cmpxchg %dil,(%r14)
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� �� jmpq 19c
�229:� cmpq $0x0,-0x38(%rbp)
� � movb $0x0,0x1(%rbx)
� �� je 276
�234:� movb $0x1,0x44(%r12)
� � mov $0x3,%esi
� � mov %rbx,%rdi
� � callq 0xffffffff8109f7a0
� � xchg %ax,%ax
� � movzbl (%rbx),%eax
� �� jmpq ca
�251:� mov (%r12),%rax
0.14 � � test %rax,%rax
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
� �� jne 12c
�262:� pause
0.31 � � mov (%r12),%rax
� � test %rax,%rax
� �� je 262
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
� �� jmpq 12c
�276:? mov %r12,%rsi
� � mov %rbx,%rdi
� � callq 0xffffffff810fcf90
� � mov %rax,-0x38(%rbp)
� � mov $0x3,%eax
� � xchg %al,(%rbx)
� � test %al,%al
� �� jne 234
� � mov -0x38(%rbp),%rax
� � movb $0x1,(%rbx)
� � movq $0x0,(%rax)
� ���jmpq fc
> For example, if you run a virtual 16-core system on a physical machine
> that then doesn't consistently give 16 cores to the virtual machine,
> you'll get no end of hiccups.
I learnt that lesson 6-7 years ago when I first started doing
baseline benchmarking to compare bare metal to virtualised IO
performance.
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david(a)fromorbit.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, LKP <lkp@01.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [xfs] 68a9f5e700: aim7.jobs-per-min -13.6% regression
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 08:02:50 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160816220250.GI16044@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwmRPuhLLqN8D-3pcbkqoC05t=1dtnsv8k074uD7QNxBg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 06:51:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Anyway, including the direct reclaim call paths gets
> __remove_mapping() a bit higher, and _raw_spin_lock_irqsave climbs to
> 0.26%. But perhaps more importlantly, looking at what __remove_mapping
> actually *does* (apart from the spinlock) gives us:
>
> - inside remove_mapping itself (0.11% on its own - flat cost, no
> child accounting)
>
> 48.50 │ lock cmpxchg %edx,0x1c(%rbx)
>
> so that's about 0.05%
>
> - 0.40% __delete_from_page_cache (0.22%
> radix_tree_replace_clear_tags, 0.13%__radix_tree_lookup)
>
> - 0.06% workingset_eviction()
>
> so I'm not actually seeing anything *new* expensive in there. The
> __delete_from_page_cache() overhead may have changed a bit with the
> tagged tree changes, but this doesn't look like memcg.
>
> But we clearly have very different situations.
>
> What does your profile show for when you actually dig into
> __remove_mapping() itself?, Looking at your flat profile, I'm assuming
> you get
- 22.26% 0.93% [kernel] [k] __remove_mapping
- 3.86% __remove_mapping
- 18.35% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
__pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
1.32% __delete_from_page_cache
- 0.92% _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
__raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock
And the instruction level profile:
.....
� xor %ecx,%ecx
� mov %rax,%r15
0.39 � mov $0x2,%eax
� lock cmpxchg %ecx,0x1c(%rbx)
32.56 � cmp $0x2,%eax
� � jne 12e
� mov 0x20(%rbx),%rax
� lea -0x1(%rax),%rdx
0.39 � test $0x1,%al
� cmove %rbx,%rdx
� mov (%rdx),%rax
0.39 � test $0x10,%al
� � jne 127
� mov (%rbx),%rcx
� shr $0xf,%rcx
� and $0x1,%ecx
� � jne 14a
� mov 0x68(%r14),%rax
36.03 � xor %esi,%esi
� test %r13b,%r13b
� mov 0x50(%rax),%rdx
1.16 � � jne e8
0.96 � a9: mov %rbx,%rdi
.....
Indicates most time on the cmpxchg for the page ref followed by the
grabbing on the ->freepage op vector:
freepage = mapping->a_ops->freepage;
> I come back to wondering whether maybe you're hitting some PV-lock problem.
>
> I know queued_spin_lock_slowpath() is ok. I'm not entirely sure
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() is.
It's the same code AFAICT, except the pv version jumps straight to
the "queue" case.
> So I'd love to see you try the non-PV case, but I also think it might
> be interesting to see what the instruction profile for
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() itself is. They share a lot of code
> (there's some interesting #include games going on to make
> queued_spin_lock_slowpath() actually *be*
> __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath() with some magic hooks), but there
> might be issues.
0.03 � data16 data16 data16 xchg %ax,%ax
� push %rbp
0.00 � mov %rsp,%rbp
0.01 � push %r15
� push %r14
� push %r13
0.01 � push %r12
� mov $0x18740,%r12
� push %rbx
� mov %rdi,%rbx
� sub $0x10,%rsp
� add %gs:0x7ef0d0e0(%rip),%r12
� movslq 0xc(%r12),%rax
0.02 � mov %gs:0x7ef0d0db(%rip),%r15d
� add $0x1,%r15d
� shl $0x12,%r15d
� lea 0x1(%rax),%edx
0.01 � mov %edx,0xc(%r12)
� mov %eax,%edx
� shl $0x4,%rax
� add %rax,%r12
� shl $0x10,%edx
� movq $0x0,(%r12)
0.02 � or %edx,%r15d
� mov %gs:0x7ef0d0ad(%rip),%eax
0.00 � movl $0x0,0x8(%r12)
0.01 � mov %eax,0x40(%r12)
� movb $0x0,0x44(%r12)
� mov (%rdi),%eax
0.88 � test %ax,%ax
� � jne 8f
0.02 � mov $0x1,%edx
� lock cmpxchg %dl,(%rdi)
0.38 � test %al,%al
� � je 14a
0.02 � 8f: mov %r15d,%eax
� shr $0x10,%eax
� xchg %ax,0x2(%rbx)
2.07 � shl $0x10,%eax
� test %eax,%eax
� � jne 171
� movq $0x0,-0x30(%rbp)
0.02 � ac: movzbl 0x44(%r12),%eax
0.97 � mov $0x1,%r13d
� mov $0x100,%r14d
� cmp $0x2,%al
� sete %al
� movzbl %al,%eax
� mov %rax,-0x38(%rbp)
0.00 � ca: movb $0x0,0x44(%r12)
0.00 � mov $0x8000,%edx
� movb $0x1,0x1(%rbx)
� � jmp e6
0.04 � db: pause
8.04 � sub $0x1,%edx
� � je 229
� e6: movzbl (%rbx),%eax
7.54 � test %al,%al
� � jne db
0.10 � mov %r14d,%eax
0.06 � lock cmpxchg %r13w,(%rbx)
2.93 ? cmp $0x100,%ax
� � jne db
� fc: mov (%rbx),%edx
0.37 � mov $0x1,%ecx
� or $0x1,%edx
� � jmp 114
0.01 �108: mov %edx,%eax
� lock cmpxchg %ecx,(%rbx)
0.26 � cmp %edx,%eax
� � je 14a
� mov %eax,%edx
�114: mov %edx,%eax
0.00 � xor %ax,%ax
� cmp %r15d,%eax
� � je 108
0.01 � cmpq $0x0,-0x30(%rbp)
? movb $0x1,(%rbx)
� � je 251
�12c: mov -0x30(%rbp),%rsi
0.01 � mov $0x1,%eax
� mov $0x2,%edx
� movl $0x1,0x8(%rsi)
0.11 � lock cmpxchg %dl,0x44(%rsi)
2.34 � cmp $0x1,%al
� � je 160
�14a: decl %gs:0x7ef1b5bb(%rip)
0.02 � add $0x10,%rsp
� pop %rbx
� pop %r12
0.00 � pop %r13
� pop %r14
� pop %r15
� pop %rbp
� � retq
�160: mov -0x30(%rbp),%rsi
� movb $0x3,(%rbx)
� mov %rbx,%rdi
� callq 0xffffffff810fcf90
� � jmp 14a
�171: lea 0x44(%r12),%r14
� mov %rax,%r13
� shr $0x12,%eax
� shr $0xc,%r13
� sub $0x1,%eax
� and $0x30,%r13d
� cltq
� add $0x18740,%r13
? add -0x7d8164c0(,%rax,8),%r13
0.03 � mov %r12,0x0(%r13)
0.38 �19c: mov $0x8000,%eax
� � jmp 1b7
0.04 �1a3: test %al,%al
� � jne 1b0
� movzbl 0x44(%r13),%edx
1.66 � test %dl,%dl
� � jne 1f1
1.75 �1b0: pause
64.57 � sub $0x1
0.04 � � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
0.03 � � test %eax,%eax
� �� jne 1d4
�1c9:� pause
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� � test %eax,%eax
� �� je 1c9
�1d4:� mov (%r12),%rax
� � test %rax,%rax
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
0.05 � �� je ac
� � mov -0x30(%rbp),%rax
� � prefet (%rax)
0.25 � �� jmpq ac
�1f1:� mov $0x1,%eax
� � xchg %al,0x44(%r12)
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� � test %eax,%eax
� �� jne 213
� � mov %r14,%rdi
� � mov $0x1,%esi
� � callq 0xffffffff8109f7a0
� � xchg %ax,%ax
�213:� mov $0x1,%eax
� � xor %edi,%edi
� � lock cmpxchg %dil,(%r14)
� � mov 0x8(%r12),%eax
� �� jmpq 19c
�229:� cmpq $0x0,-0x38(%rbp)
� � movb $0x0,0x1(%rbx)
� �� je 276
�234:� movb $0x1,0x44(%r12)
� � mov $0x3,%esi
� � mov %rbx,%rdi
� � callq 0xffffffff8109f7a0
� � xchg %ax,%ax
� � movzbl (%rbx),%eax
� �� jmpq ca
�251:� mov (%r12),%rax
0.14 � � test %rax,%rax
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
� �� jne 12c
�262:� pause
0.31 � � mov (%r12),%rax
� � test %rax,%rax
� �� je 262
� � mov %rax,-0x30(%rbp)
� �� jmpq 12c
�276:? mov %r12,%rsi
� � mov %rbx,%rdi
� � callq 0xffffffff810fcf90
� � mov %rax,-0x38(%rbp)
� � mov $0x3,%eax
� � xchg %al,(%rbx)
� � test %al,%al
� �� jne 234
� � mov -0x38(%rbp),%rax
� � movb $0x1,(%rbx)
� � movq $0x0,(%rax)
� ���jmpq fc
> For example, if you run a virtual 16-core system on a physical machine
> that then doesn't consistently give 16 cores to the virtual machine,
> you'll get no end of hiccups.
I learnt that lesson 6-7 years ago when I first started doing
baseline benchmarking to compare bare metal to virtualised IO
performance.
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-16 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 219+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CA+55aFy14nUnJQ_GdF=j8Fa9xiH70c6fY2G3q5HQ01+8z1z3qQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-08-15 5:12 ` [xfs] 68a9f5e700: aim7.jobs-per-min -13.6% regression Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 22:22 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 22:22 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 22:42 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 22:42 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 23:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 23:20 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 23:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 23:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:44 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:44 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 15:05 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-16 15:05 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-16 17:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 17:47 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-17 15:48 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-17 15:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Michal Hocko
2016-08-17 16:42 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-17 16:42 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Michal Hocko
2016-08-17 15:49 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-17 15:49 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 0:45 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 0:45 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 7:11 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-18 7:11 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-18 13:24 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 13:24 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 17:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-18 17:55 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-18 21:19 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-18 21:19 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-18 22:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-18 22:25 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-19 9:00 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-19 9:00 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Michal Hocko
2016-08-19 10:49 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-19 10:49 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-19 23:48 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-19 23:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-20 1:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-20 1:08 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-20 12:16 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-20 12:16 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-19 15:08 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-19 15:08 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-09-01 23:32 ` Dave Chinner
2016-09-01 23:32 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-09-06 15:37 ` Mel Gorman
2016-09-06 15:37 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-09-06 15:52 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-06 15:52 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-24 15:40 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-24 15:40 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-25 9:37 ` Mel Gorman
2016-08-25 9:37 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Mel Gorman
2016-08-18 2:44 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-18 2:44 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:15 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:38 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:38 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:50 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:19 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 1:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 1:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 22:02 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-08-16 22:02 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 23:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 23:23 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 23:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 23:01 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:17 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:17 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-16 0:45 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-09 14:33 kernel test robot
2016-08-09 14:33 ` [lkp] " kernel test robot
2016-08-10 18:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-10 18:24 ` [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-10 23:08 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-10 23:08 ` [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-10 23:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-10 23:51 ` [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-10 23:58 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-10 23:58 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 0:11 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 0:11 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 0:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 0:23 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 0:33 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 0:33 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 1:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 1:00 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 4:46 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 4:46 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 17:22 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-15 17:22 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-16 0:08 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 0:08 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 15:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-11 15:57 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-11 16:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 16:55 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 17:51 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 17:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 19:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 20:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-11 20:00 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-11 20:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 20:35 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 22:16 ` Al Viro
2016-08-11 22:16 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Al Viro
2016-08-11 22:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 22:30 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 21:16 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 21:16 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 21:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 21:40 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-11 22:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-11 22:08 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-12 0:54 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 0:54 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 2:23 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 2:23 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 2:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 2:32 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 2:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-12 2:52 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-12 3:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 3:20 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 4:16 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 4:16 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 5:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 5:02 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 6:04 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 6:04 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 6:29 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-12 6:29 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-12 8:51 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-12 8:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-12 10:02 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 10:02 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 10:43 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-12 10:43 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 0:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 0:30 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 21:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 21:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 22:07 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 22:07 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 22:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 22:15 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-13 22:51 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 22:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-14 14:50 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-14 14:50 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-14 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-14 16:17 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-08-14 23:46 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-14 23:46 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-14 23:57 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-14 23:57 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 14:14 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 14:14 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 21:22 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 21:22 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-16 12:20 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-16 12:20 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 20:30 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-15 20:30 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-22 22:09 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-22 22:09 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-09-26 6:25 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-26 6:25 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-09-26 14:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-09-26 14:55 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Christoph Hellwig
2016-09-27 0:52 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-27 0:52 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-16 13:25 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-16 13:25 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 23:32 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-13 23:32 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 2:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 2:27 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 3:56 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 3:56 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 18:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-12 18:03 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-13 23:58 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-13 23:58 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 0:48 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 0:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 1:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 1:37 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 2:28 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 2:28 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 2:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 2:53 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Linus Torvalds
2016-08-15 5:00 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 5:00 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-15 5:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-08-15 5:03 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Ingo Molnar
2016-08-17 16:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-17 16:24 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-15 12:58 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-15 12:58 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Fengguang Wu
2016-08-11 1:16 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 1:16 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 1:32 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 1:32 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 2:36 ` Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-11 2:36 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Ye Xiaolong
2016-08-11 3:05 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-11 3:05 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 1:26 ` Dave Chinner
2016-08-12 1:26 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Dave Chinner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160816220250.GI16044@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.