[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150929074151.0fe32fc9@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 07:41:51 -0400
From: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
To: kernel test robot <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: lkp@...org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [lkp] [nfsd] 4aac1bf05b: -2.9% fsmark.files_per_sec
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:49:32 +0800
kernel test robot <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>
> =========================================================================================
> tbox_group/testcase/rootfs/kconfig/compiler/cpufreq_governor/iterations/nr_threads/disk/fs/fs2/filesize/test_size/sync_method/nr_directories/nr_files_per_directory:
> lkp-ne04/fsmark/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/performance/1x/32t/1HDD/xfs/nfsv4/5K/400M/fsyncBeforeClose/16d/256fpd
>
> commit:
> cd2d35ff27c4fda9ba73b0aa84313e8e20ce4d2c
> 4aac1bf05b053a201a4b392dd9a684fb2b7e6103
>
A question...
I think my tree should now contain a fix for this, but with a
performance regression like this it's difficult to know for sure.
Is there some (automated) way to request that the KTR redo this test?
If not, will I get a note saying "problem seems to now be fixed" or do
I just take a lack of further emails from the KTR about this as a sign
that it's resolved?
Thanks!
--
Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists