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=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 48F57C433E0 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9CF20714 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:46:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726680AbgGXCpG (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 22:45:06 -0400 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:38883 "EHLO mga06.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726503AbgGXCpG (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 22:45:06 -0400 IronPort-SDR: Guh+m5ut9YPsv6xJ9kqYjhFCHkibjsJrcI37GQc54pzwwhPuhcdOQ9NMm7cR2OfcU7bLRpqh8R axFWHbK4Eraw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9691"; a="212186158" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,389,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="212186158" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Jul 2020 19:45:05 -0700 IronPort-SDR: iBx90Pr7CFLoBrXMYma7ZeELqZZhGNtzLh3cmTkYLqziolVzBvsjenanNTiDKag9mwB731SVIm cb/2DPDyllxw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,389,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="319181835" Received: from shao2-debian.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.13.3]) ([10.239.13.3]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Jul 2020 19:45:03 -0700 Subject: Re: [fsnotify] c738fbabb0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -9.5% regression To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Jan Kara , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org References: <20200721001505.GD19262@shao2-debian> From: Rong Chen Message-ID: <9a2a4086-fbad-b4f8-9c00-2b7606441022@intel.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:44:32 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/21/20 11:59 PM, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 3:15 AM kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -9.5% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit: >> >> >> commit: c738fbabb0ff62d0f9a9572e56e65d05a1b34c6a ("fsnotify: fold fsnotify() call into fsnotify_parent()") > Strange, that's a pretty dumb patch moving some inlined code from one > function to > another (assuming there are no fsnotify marks in this test). > > Unless I am missing something the only thing that changes slightly is > an extra d_inode(file->f_path.dentry) deference. > I can get rid of it. > > Is it possible to ask for a re-test with fix patch (attached)? Hi Amir, We failed to apply this patch, could you tell us the base commit or the base branch? Best Regards, Rong Chen