mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
	lkp@01.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	0day robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [lkp] [locking/mutexes] cb4bbc457b: -40.0% unixbench.score
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 18:48:01 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160122024801.GA23224@linux-uzut.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874me6jql0.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016, kernel test robot wrote:

>FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>
>https://github.com/0day-ci/linux Ding-Tianhong/locking-mutexes-don-t-spin-on-owner-when-wait-list-is-not-NULL/20160121-173317
>commit cb4bbc457bfed6194ffab1b10c7be73b3f16ca2d ("locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL.")

I'm not sure why this would even be reported, as this patch has not been accepted
or acked or nothin', by anyone. In this particular case that raw performance drop
is because spinning is pretty much disabled by Ding's change. Totally expected for
the kind of workload unixbench triggers.

All this does is hurt lkml-searchability.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

       reply	other threads:[~2016-01-22  2:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <874me6jql0.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
2016-01-22  2:48 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2016-01-25  1:23   ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2016-01-25  6:05     ` Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160122024801.GA23224@linux-uzut.site \
    --to=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
    --cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome