From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754929Ab0AFHou (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 02:44:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752485Ab0AFHot (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 02:44:49 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:47367 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751612Ab0AFHos (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 02:44:48 -0500 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18NAt1jWoUNdpyqEMdXRrR2fd9ZIuwvGYvRsHnhyB z5ci4y70H4uPcQ Subject: Re: tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1 From: Mike Galbraith To: Lin Ming Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" , "mingo@elte.hu" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , linux-kernel , "Zhang, Yanmin" In-Reply-To: <1262760774.32058.2.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> References: <1261739467.10685.18.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1261902760.6201.33.camel@marge.simson.net> <1262052582.10685.59.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1262064292.6412.30.camel@marge.simson.net> <1262063959.13697.6.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1262065745.17082.0.camel@marge.simson.net> <1262757688.6007.5.camel@marge.simson.net> <1262757307.32058.0.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1262760774.32058.2.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:44:45 +0100 Message-Id: <1262763885.1034.1.camel@marge.simson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.67 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 14:52 +0800, Lin Ming wrote: > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 13:55 +0800, Lin Ming wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 14:01 +0800, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Have you tried tbench with the vmark regression fix? If not, mind > > > giving it a shot? > > I just test the patch with 2.6.33-rc2, but no help. > Still ~4% regression compared to 2.6.32. Darn. Thanks for testing. -Mike