From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, ying.huang@intel.com,
feng.tang@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [xfs] ab23a77687: aim7.jobs-per-min -18.5% regression
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:32:19 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210912233219.GB2335@rh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210909142355.GA6270@xsang-OptiPlex-9020>
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:23:55PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>
> Hi Dave Chinner,
>
> we reported "[xfs] 6df693ed7b: aim7.jobs-per-min -15.7% regression" as [1]
> when this change is still on
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfs-linux.git xfs-5.15-merge
>
> now this change is on mainline.
> so we report again to highlight we still observe similar performance regression
> on mainline.
>
> previously we also tried to test by turning off RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER per your
> guidance, but still observed similar regression, though we are not sure if our
> method to turn off RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER is enough. the detail result is in [2]
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210809064248.GB5761@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210818085248.GA28771@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/
Did you look at the config that was generated before running the
tests again?
> #
> # Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT.
> # Linux/x86_64 5.14.0-rc4 Kernel Configuration
> #
....
> CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW=y
> CONFIG_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
> CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
> CONFIG_LOCK_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
....
So these tests were still run with the same RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
configuration, and so unsurprisingly the result was the same with
spin contention on the directory inode rwsem.
You'll save yourself (and everyone else) a lot of time by validating
that your config changes are valid before re-running tests...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
dchinner@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-12 23:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-09 14:23 kernel test robot
2021-09-12 23:32 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2021-09-18 8:48 ` Oliver Sang
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=20210912233219.GB2335@rh \
--to=dchinner@redhat.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=zhengjun.xing@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®