[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:40:49 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Eric Farman <farman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
????????? <jinpuwang@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"KVM-ML (kvm@...r.kernel.org)" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
vcaputo@...garu.com, Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: sysbench throughput degradation in 4.13+
On 10/10/2017 07:26 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 03:51:37PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> On Fri, 06 Oct, at 11:36:23AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It's a similar story for hackbench-threads-{pipes,sockets}, i.e. pipes
>>>> regress but performance is restored for sockets.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, like a dope, I forgot to re-run netperf with your WA_WEIGHT
>>>> patch. So I've queued that up now and it should be done by tomorrow.
>>>
>>> Yeah, netperf results look fine for either your NO_WA_WEIGHT or
>>> WA_WEIGHT patch.
>>>
>>> Any ETA on when this is going to tip?
>>
>> Just hit a few hours ago :-)
>
> I admit that time machines are really handy!
>
> Thanks,
Are we going to schedule this for 4.13 stable as well?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists