[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACSApvaG7uJDeoaPdSuLAoEgZK2YQHRn34hBQyk4y+5uH86cMA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:28:40 -0500
From: Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@...gle.com>,
Guantao Liu <guantaol@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] simplify ep_poll
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:22 PM Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2020, Soheil Hassas Yeganeh wrote:
> >FWIW, I also stress-tested the patch series applied on top of
> >linux-next/master for a couple of hours.
>
> Out of curiosity, what exactly did you use for testing?
That's a good question. I ran two flavors of tests:
- The epoll_wakeup_test selftest in a tight loop on two different
CPUs. This includes the newly added epoll61 test case for the timeout
race.
- Internal production loadtests (i.e., multi-node benchmarks).
Thanks,
Soheil
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists