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=-12.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 A705BC433F5 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 23:32:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7993760FE3 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 23:32:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236712AbhILXdr (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:33:47 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:41769 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236662AbhILXdq (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:33:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1631489550; 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=xzTE9yjUoCB5GMFuVGpGO3mw7g+iYVf6cDy06tcZwZI=; b=HHh+KVHKruiusKwQfOxJxk015Sl96dXZgkeMKMKfYItNW9tZZbIRciI5tOshf65Io2J7w2 954DIVlIOZpt9yAJI+9dLaErN4Qa3bpMGg7GKtmF7I179bENDrUNFV4qVayJ4umiwFP8As RhF0vcOSuYctLzifMHlzjcgR594uEvw= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-408-Q7vI-vrFNOON44iikLMR5Q-1; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:32:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Q7vI-vrFNOON44iikLMR5Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60B31800D41; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 23:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rh (vpn2-54-128.bne.redhat.com [10.64.54.128]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CB375C25A; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 23:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [::1] (helo=rh) by rh with esmtps (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1mPYxR-0000wn-Pc; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:32:21 +1000 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:32:19 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: kernel test robot Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , LKML , 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 Message-ID: <20210912233219.GB2335@rh> References: <20210909142355.GA6270@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210909142355.GA6270@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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