From: Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@google.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [fanotify] a8b98c808e: stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per_sec 32.2% improvement
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2021 07:56:18 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YLlQAqlUxEt4eTiR@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603084324.GC23647@quack2.suse.cz>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 971 bytes --]
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 03-06-21 09:57:15, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 4:36 AM kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> wro
> > > Greeting,
> > >
> > > FYI, we noticed a 32.2% improvement of stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per_sec due to commit:
> > >
> > >
> > > commit: a8b98c808eab3ec8f1b5a64be967b0f4af4cae43 ("fanotify: fix permission model of unprivileged group")
> > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I guess now we know what caused the reported regression:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210511124632.GL24154(a)quack2.suse.cz/
> >
> > I didn't know that capable() is so significant.
>
> Yeah, I wouldn't guess either. Interesting.
Indeed, interesting! :)
While on the topic of stress-ng, it reminds me to set this up on my server
so we can perform such regressions before merging fanotify changes into
master.
/M
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@google.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@lists.01.org, kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com,
zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [fanotify] a8b98c808e: stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per_sec 32.2% improvement
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 07:56:18 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YLlQAqlUxEt4eTiR@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603084324.GC23647@quack2.suse.cz>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 03-06-21 09:57:15, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 4:36 AM kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> wro
> > > Greeting,
> > >
> > > FYI, we noticed a 32.2% improvement of stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per_sec due to commit:
> > >
> > >
> > > commit: a8b98c808eab3ec8f1b5a64be967b0f4af4cae43 ("fanotify: fix permission model of unprivileged group")
> > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I guess now we know what caused the reported regression:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210511124632.GL24154@quack2.suse.cz/
> >
> > I didn't know that capable() is so significant.
>
> Yeah, I wouldn't guess either. Interesting.
Indeed, interesting! :)
While on the topic of stress-ng, it reminds me to set this up on my server
so we can perform such regressions before merging fanotify changes into
master.
/M
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-03 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-03 1:53 [fanotify] a8b98c808e: stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per_sec 32.2% improvement kernel test robot
2021-06-03 1:53 ` kernel test robot
2021-06-03 6:57 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-06-03 6:57 ` Amir Goldstein
2021-06-03 8:43 ` Jan Kara
2021-06-03 8:43 ` Jan Kara
2021-06-03 21:56 ` Matthew Bobrowski [this message]
2021-06-03 21:56 ` Matthew Bobrowski
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=YLlQAqlUxEt4eTiR@google.com \
--to=repnop@google.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.