[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc69ee03-1a74-c15d-ec94-da3b987ab8b1@leemhuis.info>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 11:28:08 +0200
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzju@...hat.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.com>, regressions@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: vchiq: Performance regression since 5.18-rc1
[TLDR: I'm adding this regression report to the list of tracked
regressions; all text from me you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already already in similar form.]
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
On 22.05.22 01:22, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>
> while testing the staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm driver with
> my Raspberry Pi 3 B+ (multi_v7_defconfig) i noticed a huge performance
> regression since [ff042f4a9b050895a42cae893cc01fa2ca81b95c] mm:
> lru_cache_disable: replace work queue synchronization with synchronize_rcu
>
> Usually i run "vchiq_test -f 1" to see the driver is still working [1].
>
> Before commit:
>
> real 0m1,500s
> user 0m0,068s
> sys 0m0,846s
>
> After commit:
>
> real 7m11,449s
> user 0m2,049s
> sys 0m0,023s
Thanks for the report.
To be sure below issue doesn't fall through the cracks unnoticed, I'm
adding it to regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot:
#regzbot ^introduced ff042f4a9b050895a42cae893cc01fa2ca81b95
#regzbot title mm: chiq_test runs 7 minutes instead of ~ 1 second.
#regzbot ignore-activity
This isn't a regression? This issue or a fix for it are already
discussed somewhere else? It was fixed already? You want to clarify when
the regression started to happen? Or point out I got the title or
something else totally wrong? Then just reply -- ideally with also
telling regzbot about it, as explained here:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/tracked-regression/
Reminder for developers: When fixing the issue, add 'Link:' tags
pointing to the report (the mail this one replied to), as the kernel's
documentation call for; above page explains why this is important for
tracked regressions.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
P.S.: As the Linux kernel's regression tracker I deal with a lot of
reports and sometimes miss something important when writing mails like
this. If that's the case here, don't hesitate to tell me in a public
reply, it's in everyone's interest to set the public record straight.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists