From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFF751804F; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719464050; cv=none; b=nSUO7vVMCtp3HWrJmzGt0/KEvtPktLA8aPn3g5TG5LbnzAhchdYiYkj0IzfjNF0TPTuoJNcsdbWLzCJQuHxPNQ35Qd0GXhryLaCsStQo+z9SP2KoqPcSVZ8kNDWFG2g3aIkzbTK+ViI4/P3rJeO48vyCFvKSlU73xglzEuW9K4k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719464050; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LlK0F5tTrVM/p36ygp+Mt3SiuwhdpQbrsHRgx3HnkSg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jp9aRjc6bvVU7htso8INg4pjbpHLdL+us9mGkJjZnw4skL10P4+a7h8xuWf8D3+egiHhjtmZDEwKATxHoTHBnOJXa/j6T3Skly6CKJcEuRectplFZ07Zg3O821ZqomuBBnnnesTEGGW79CYhAGlrLjlERjnoPM5pVPB9OoMRNqA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=uzcGPgco; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="uzcGPgco" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=/fzE2yWElnzU7XRficmyE9tfka6WnF3hLS24PJakxl4=; b=uzcGPgconVlUhJahqA4o0y4rP2 YDkQfdW0m0w2u8N8BRaxbwBTF1twTy53aPn4xBPj/AfBrb0WxTzWJH8wD6oR43WzK3V70db4qXtWY 0IIZI+2mDcUbXHX9Anl5SaO8PZqQtBzUCFGUjAdJ7ExnkxJgGk1kclJpDyt1NPlhJH6k1SD2KJv1r Y/aWT38dOOUqqw6WO2aC6zoYnYWj+859j2ETzBrnZoTEbtU0f3blIKoRcb5DyUh8Hm74KMCv5zkZg gzrN7RVyue7JLzZcBns6ISX0k4yPom7ZauQBJlbkxj+mZ51Z3qG2KMut3g2uFWJoxlvZFyPWvc2cp 37dKQmlg==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sMh93-00000009D8d-4Br2; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:54:06 +0000 Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 21:54:05 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Oliver Sang Cc: Christoph Hellwig , oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com, Jens Axboe , Ulf Hansson , Damien Le Moal , Hannes Reinecke , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, nbd@other.debian.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-bcache@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com Subject: Re: [axboe-block:for-next] [block] 1122c0c1cc: aim7.jobs-per-min 22.6% improvement Message-ID: References: <202406250948.e0044f1d-oliver.sang@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 10:35:38AM +0800, Oliver Sang wrote: > > I failed to apply patch in your previous reply to 1122c0c1cc or current tip > of axboe-block/for-next: > c1440ed442a58 (axboe-block/for-next) Merge branch 'for-6.11/block' into for-next That already includes it. > > but it's ok to apply upon next: > * 0fc4bfab2cd45 (tag: next-20240625) Add linux-next specific files for 20240625 > > I've already started the test based on this applyment. > is the expectation that patch should not introduce performance change comparing > to 0fc4bfab2cd45? > > or if this applyment is not ok, please just give me guidance. Thanks! The expectation is that the latest block branch (and thus linux-next) doesn't see this performance change.