[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210203024951.GA1837780@carbon.DHCP.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 18:49:51 -0800
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>
To: "Xing, Zhengjun" <zhengjun.xing@...el.com>
CC: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <lkp@...ts.01.org>,
<lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [mm] 10befea91b: hackbench.throughput -62.4% regression
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 04:18:27PM +0800, Xing, Zhengjun wrote:
>
>
> On 1/14/2021 11:18 AM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:51:51AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > Greeting,
> > >
> > > FYI, we noticed a -62.4% regression of hackbench.throughput due to commit:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Commit "mm: memcg/slab: optimize objcg stock draining" (currently only in the mm tree,
> > so no stable hash) should improve the hackbench regression.
> The commit has been merged into Linux mainline :
> 3de7d4f25a7438f09fef4e71ef111f1805cd8e7c ("mm: memcg/slab: optimize objcg
> stock draining")
> I test the regression still existed.
Hm, so in your setup it's about the same with and without this commit?
It's strange because I've received a letter stating a 45.2% improvement recently:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/1/27/83
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists