From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04185C433DF for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 05:12:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE816206DC for ; Thu, 14 May 2020 05:12:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725967AbgENFMk (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 01:12:40 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:8386 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725788AbgENFMj (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2020 01:12:39 -0400 IronPort-SDR: x4eLm4s8EycAxukLIjVESMrAwWJmQLlTxEeqyNTFSRTzY0WgV+I0Ms98nB60sr51WL9CWWzGbL t2FUxm3Tjn2g== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2020 22:12:39 -0700 IronPort-SDR: +AqZpAh+ZgEX+8D7aMBDV9LzVC160bZ2wR+gC48uAOo39K9V47xOvvJiJGvpLpE7ZvgtmTXWYl sfm9U3fu2gtA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,390,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="437771590" Received: from shao2-debian.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.13.3]) ([10.239.13.3]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2020 22:12:36 -0700 Subject: Re: [Jfs-discussion] [fs] 05c5a0273b: netperf.Throughput_total_tps -71.8% regression To: Christian Kujau Cc: Jia-Ju Bai , shaggy@kernel.org, jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, Markus.Elfring@web.de References: <20200512030929.GA5770@shao2-debian> From: Rong Chen Message-ID: <5d4fbe21-7959-d53f-76c5-ed0299d8db23@intel.com> Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 13:12:18 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/14/20 12:27 PM, Christian Kujau wrote: > On Tue, 12 May 2020, kernel test robot wrote: >> FYI, we noticed a -71.8% regression of netperf.Throughput_total_tps due to commit: > As noted in this report, netperf is used to "measure various aspect of > networking performance". Are we sure the bisect is correct? JFS is a > filesystem and is not touching net/ in any way. So, having not attempted > to reproduce this, maybe the JFS commit is a red herring? > > C. Hi, The commit also causes -74.6% regression of will-it-scale.per_thread_ops: in testcase: will-it-scale on test machine: 8 threads Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770K CPU @ 3.50GHz with 16G memory with following parameters: nr_task: 100% mode: thread test: unlink2 cpufreq_governor: performance ucode: 0x21 I'll send another report for this regression. Best Regards, Rong Chen