linux-kernel - Re: [fsnotify] c738fbabb0: will-it-scale.per_process

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <9a2a4086-fbad-b4f8-9c00-2b7606441022@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:44:32 +0800
From:   Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkp@...ts.01.org
Subject: Re: [fsnotify] c738fbabb0: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -9.5%
 regression



On 7/21/20 11:59 PM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 3:15 AM kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com> 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