From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>,
oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com,
feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [xfs] 2edf06a50f: fsmark.files_per_sec -5.7% regression
Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 16:54:33 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230509065433.GT3223426@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202305090905.aff4e0e6-oliver.sang@intel.com>
On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:13:19AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> kernel test robot noticed a -5.7% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec on:
>
>
> commit: 2edf06a50f5bbe664283f3c55c480fc013221d70 ("xfs: factor xfs_alloc_vextent_this_ag() for _iterate_ags()")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
This is just a refactoring patch and doesn't change any logic.
Hence I'm sceptical that it actually resulted in a performance
regression. Indeed, the profile indicates a significant change of
behaviour in the allocator and I can't see how the commit above
would cause anything like that.
Was this a result of a bisect? If so, what were the original kernel
versions where the regression was detected?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-09 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-09 2:13 [linus:master] [xfs] 2edf06a50f: fsmark.files_per_sec -5.7% regression kernel test robot
2023-05-09 6:54 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2023-05-09 7:10 ` Dave Chinner
[not found] ` <ZF3uXe+cjAsfCLic@xsang-OptiPlex-9020>
2023-05-12 23:05 ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-14 14:36 ` Feng Tang
2023-05-15 16:57 ` Darrick J. Wong
2023-05-15 22:20 ` Dave Chinner
2023-05-16 2:46 ` Feng Tang
2023-05-16 3:07 ` Zhang, Rui
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=20230509065433.GT3223426@dread.disaster.area \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox