From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752378AbcHNIe4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 14 Aug 2016 04:34:56 -0400
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:64625 "EHLO mga09.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750845AbcHNIey (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 14 Aug 2016 04:34:54 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,517,1464678000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="748367906"
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2016 06:07:27 +0800
From: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@redhat.com>, LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [xfs] 68a9f5e700: aim7.jobs-per-min -13.6% regression
Message-ID: <20160813220727.GA4901@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com>
References: <20160812025218.GB975@lst.de>
 <CA+55aFyhrDXK00mkAdLiXZVy-8=2U2WtRMwPYFF8z-JDwzuodQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160812041622.GR19025@dastard>
 <CA+55aFyed_pvUwCXSgyqvOa6VCkuE-qgFPi0CRqcnOWuXiAECQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160812060433.GS19025@dastard>
 <20160812062934.GA17589@yexl-desktop>
 <20160812085124.GB19354@yexl-desktop>
 <20160812100208.GA16044@dastard>
 <20160813003054.GA3101@lst.de>
 <20160813214825.GA31667@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160813214825.GA31667@lst.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Christoph,

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 11:48:25PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 02:30:54AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Below is a patch I hacked up this morning to do just that.  It passes
>> xfstests, but I've not done any real benchmarking with it.  If the
>> reduced lookup overhead in it doesn't help enough we'll need to some
>> sort of look aside cache for the information, but I hope that we
>> can avoid that.  And yes, it's a rather large patch - but the old
>> path was so entangled that I couldn't come up with something lighter.
>
>Hi Fengguang or Xiaolong,
>
>any chance to add this thread to a lkp run?

Sure. To which base should I apply it? Or if you already pushed the
git tree, I'll test your commit directly.

Thanks,
Fengguang