lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:44:25 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <>
To:     kernel test robot <>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <>,
        Minchan Kim <>,
        Hillf Danton <>,
        Mel Gorman <>,
        Johannes Weiner <>,
        Andrew Morton <>,
        LKML <>,
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan]  5e56dfbd83:  fsmark.files_per_sec
 -11.1% regression

On Mon 23-01-17 09:26:44, kernel test robot wrote:
> Greeting,
> FYI, we noticed a -11.1% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec due to commit:
> commit: 5e56dfbd837421b7fa3c6c06018c6701e2704917 ("mm, vmscan: consider eligible zones in get_scan_count")
> master

This is more than unexpected. This patch should be basically noop for
anything but CONFIG_HIGHMEM systems. And your config says this is 64b
kernel. Are those results reproducible? And could you try to compare
perf profiles before and after the patch.
Michal Hocko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists