linux-kernel - Re: [LKP] Re: [io_uring] 584b0180f0: phoronix-test-suite.fio.SequentialWrite.IO_uring.Yes.Yes.1MB.DefaultTestDirectory.mb

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a6567482-0fcf-4bff-87e7-81a41a77e928@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 08:27:45 +0800
From:   Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@...el.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
CC:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
        <lkp@...ts.01.org>, <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [io_uring] 584b0180f0:
 phoronix-test-suite.fio.SequentialWrite.IO_uring.Yes.Yes.1MB.DefaultTestDirectory.mb_s
 -10.2% regression



On 7/19/2022 12:27 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 7/17/22 9:30 PM, Yin Fengwei wrote:
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> On 7/15/2022 11:58 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> In terms of making this more obvious, does the below also fix it for
>>> you?
>>
>> The regression is still there after applied the change you posted.
> 
> Still don't see the regression here, using ext4. I get about 1020-1045
> IOPS with or without the patch you sent.
> 
> This is running it in a vm, and the storage device is nvme. What is
> hosting your ext4 fs?
> 
My local testing system is also a vm with SATA disk. LKP test platform
is a native one with SATA disk.

I could reproduce the regression on both environment. I will try to use
nvme to host my local vm disk and check whether we could see something
different.


Regards
Yin, Fengwei