From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-io1-f43.google.com (mail-io1-f43.google.com [209.85.166.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5B6B73513 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.166.43 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709121735; cv=none; b=nqk0iQBfCA8tdqYHEUXGLxLTN1OeY01aqT8z8H9jkgSePSFI9ayTwWQuwmAQvRubqQJlLvwX0/YVmyQ4s4imrpRgsNNiVmYAqB+jm8y0tHSUvrmArb88gqVfqd3eIOotuWVk1txtrL7QpYnPxyawYvC35Lp/f/7S71iyQNDp7dg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709121735; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6V9fLnX4djEHIHnxWds6qMnJtXmi2aPHUDNuD/uxng8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uLhMlUk54Xz/xGKyJCdq8gMsGyaaccNnRuLi7bLLDWSaCsHTSrfpDT6sOe/q2MU8tzK6kH5Zx9u16rnUbUNpboVptl7vG1qQ8yhtVNq4W1kFYyDvrxMAIR/P/1urbKKp+Q/UUfq4JDCatPJ/8A/4O5v7PC9CkZKE+7uEqKDy2FE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=e3jnP0B3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.166.43 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="e3jnP0B3" Received: by mail-io1-f43.google.com with SMTP id ca18e2360f4ac-7c7c984699fso139296439f.1 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 04:02:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1709121733; x=1709726533; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9EbFg5rAlApTq4Ur/KjS2tqf+My7HKA0PMj35gGR2V8=; b=e3jnP0B3Own0lncqddmNNFbisIlVUNinJv/ant8JrefHyA98Nf/qRg/nhsJ7z4l6Ir xjqgdHt6n773hWGDwqCo1KOwcTB4EoC6KKsT7+fwnsEqfwoT8dFi0JWruVu7xOsYW4ne hf9Wvu02PqSmeb89HJD/OphwAy/nwxbpadfKbWQObGQGh6SxnRqz7+0ImTR7J3Ke/OkE 72TgJxaLWjNOqfNNNIepI/7NbqZ/j/djhwheRg9R/OVnTYlNyPlqU95jmZ4sILrulKdf eYV2L95+BgIBbhhqOTr+/quz5GDmrA9KMxL67NyzIh8KlfxyjD3qnZbPtsoYh0X+ROB2 pGpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709121733; x=1709726533; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=9EbFg5rAlApTq4Ur/KjS2tqf+My7HKA0PMj35gGR2V8=; b=R59leng8rD9FBKHTsG1WWJBpx1INITHBV0RuTHnHkxTlzSM/1VVMIhpqiwEGF+zFqL QyYNfxHgTeANtX4MwpWh7yTlcQqvxDiyVai/mn1ElsD43+oZoMYaY6WUqZ8/RC1uSGiV ECAcEPHGghlE9CCShhPkbNXNmPkMe1emVTfGTw0fE3U41sI1m46KZiDd/VbvUK2+mHya +7lVRXSmqepgnUzLt33KEPIgb97NxMlKldXJPNWPlGb4MVNh9RxiJ+HAQ9sFFK7YyQJD yTVZokelF6FuWHDx8EZCa7QaqD9Cfm5VfUGkf35SG5YG5RDXkXOdm6GE72FE4f2cYaCJ IMhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwAdxGpyZpv7oFi5FbkhCKzRc8gKGj4ISQRiUIV9cfWByegG7hq mvo1cPVTngPwr8e6FtabONzsR1qRG8bxXE9p9bzkkG/uPJPtNcDxypXH2H9DQZU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHQ2x000uqQolclyzQgafNQ9xKVlzClv2eZYrTcDX5jTDSRh0RJ/VLEbKeg09C1QMdrtitnjA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:358:b0:7c4:61e7:9d77 with SMTP id w24-20020a056602035800b007c461e79d77mr15494595iou.19.1709121732669; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 04:02:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.107] ([103.124.138.155]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c8-20020a62e808000000b006e4625a0f0dsm7596575pfi.169.2024.02.28.04.02.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 04:02:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:02:03 +0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Network performance regression in Linux kernel 6.6 for small socket size test cases Content-Language: en-US To: Linux regressions mailing list , Abdul Anshad Azeez , edumazet@google.com, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, dsahern@kernel.org, Linux Networking , Linux Kernel Mailing List Cc: Boon Ang , John Savanyo , Peter Jonasson , Rajender M References: <8015b1f0-d37b-45de-bd24-12fc21cbf83d@leemhuis.info> From: Bagas Sanjaya In-Reply-To: <8015b1f0-d37b-45de-bd24-12fc21cbf83d@leemhuis.info> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2/28/24 16:09, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > On 28.02.24 09:32, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: >> [also Cc: regressions ML] >> >> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 12:13:27PM +0530, Abdul Anshad Azeez wrote: >>> During performance regression workload execution of the Linux >>> kernel we observed up to 30% performance decrease in a specific networking >>> workload on the 6.6 kernel compared to 6.5 (details below). The regression is >>> reproducible in both Linux VMs running on ESXi and bare metal Linux. >>> >>> [...] >>> >>> We would like to know if there are any opportunities for optimization in >>> the test cases with small socket sizes. >> >> Can you verify the regression on current mainline (v6.8-rc6)? > > Bagas, I know that you are trying to help, but this is not helpful at > all (and indirectly puts regression tracking and the kernel development > community into a bad light). > > Asking that question can be the right thing sometimes, for example in a > bugzilla ticket where the reporter is clearly reporting their first bug. > But the quoted report above clearly does not fall into that category for > various obvious reasons. > > If you want to ensure that reports like that are acted upon, wait at > least two or three work days and see if there is a reply from a > developer. In case there is none (which happens, but I assume for a bug > report like this is likely rare) prodding a bit can be okay. But even > then you definitely want to use a more friendly tone. Maybe something > like "None of the developers reacted yet; maybe none of them bothered to > take a closer look because it's unclear if the problem still happens > with the latest code. You thus might want to verify and report back if > the problem happens with latest mainline, maybe then someone will take a > closer look". > > Okay, that has way too many "maybe" in it, but I'm sure you'll get the > idea. :-D > Oops, I'm always impatient (and forgot to privately mail you) in this case. Sorry for inconvenience. -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara