[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <197fbd55-f702-e84f-2981-e8a3a32e178a@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:20:20 -0700
From: Rick Lindsley <ricklind@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>,
Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [kernfs] ea7c5fc39a: stress-ng.stream.ops_per_sec 11827.2%
improvement
On 6/10/20 7:06 PM, kernel test robot wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:13:08AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote:
>
> It seems the result of stress-ng is inaccurate if test time too
> short, we'll increase the test time to avoid unreasonable results,
> sorry for the inconvenience.
Thank you for your response! I was examining the 25 tests in the 'cpu-cache' class and had nothing but head scratching so far on what could be having that effect.
Rick
Powered by blists - more mailing lists