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=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 78B8DC4320A for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EEDA60F4C for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 22:32:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234343AbhHZWdS (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 18:33:18 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:34798 "EHLO galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231159AbhHZWdQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 18:33:16 -0400 From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1630017146; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YrtmNfUSKMqaI+mdWROUQzgaQyI2+Ot0/64zhKsNsy4=; b=HWdq1l+E3txuC+pIXxkNAB9C/+BPFn/N+dYoCZF4xGKZmVmGtYWYEp6yV+gDhE9EMgfvjd j/Nb9xY3TLaGyYo5AHUWVkF1hvmR+bj7B/iAvVvY+x4Hj1UXzxs9DbExcWV1HOpgrpdC9X 5TVBO46/VflRRb9JvvtPjlZzJAO0LgORpRTiISUyD0Bi5D/lmvo0P7NnINU+F1ROypanp7 +/e8E0sKzfoyA0uAigmUkkqe6o/D3YfoUMu8L9zzU0LbrpiXAF5eD9VmS6B5uLZ5tJJ28n w+tLYlQQKl4UbsyaxfmQHn/W77qp0ojuURzvwZRUmUBk49GU6Me3TbS/oXT3xQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1630017146; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YrtmNfUSKMqaI+mdWROUQzgaQyI2+Ot0/64zhKsNsy4=; b=yBOsLH9d/uO5VvCwgdD96uOPW1x0JeRRgGxJeJ2j0N+VRU3ewIBmvXRdHKkpmp5oWoj8xn TLNSR0hjZRftp7Dg== To: kernel report robot Cc: Marc Zyngier , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PCI/MSI] 77e89afc25: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -2.6% regression In-Reply-To: <20210818145122.GC1721@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> References: <20210818145122.GC1721@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 00:32:26 +0200 Message-ID: <87eeaf3khx.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 18 2021 at 22:51, kernel report robot wrote: > Greeting, > > FYI, we noticed a -2.6% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit: > > > commit: 77e89afc25f30abd56e76a809ee2884d7c1b63ce ("PCI/MSI: Protect msi_desc::masked for multi-MSI") > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > > > in testcase: will-it-scale > on test machine: 128 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6338 CPU @ 2.00GHz with 256G memory > with following parameters: > > nr_task: 100% > mode: process > test: lseek2 > cpufreq_governor: performance > ucode: 0xd000280 > > test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two. > test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag > Reported-by: kernel test robot There is nothing to fix. The commit cures an incorrectness. Comparing buggy code to correct code is futile. Thanks, tglx