linux-kernel - Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <05b55329-6e55-c3ff-0c41-5254a5625473@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 09:36:44 -0700
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...ts.01.org, lkp@...el.com,
        ying.huang@...el.com, feng.tang@...el.com,
        zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec -15.0%
 regression

On 2022/08/18 23:24, Oliver Sang wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:28:30AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 18/08/2022 03:06, Oliver Sang wrote:
>>
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>>>>> did I do the right thing?
>>>> Sorry but I was not really interested in 4cbfca5f77 and I see where that
>>>> build error is coming, but don't be concerned with it. However, for
>>>> avoidance of doubt, if you have results for vanilla v6.0-rc1 then that would
>>>> be appreciated.
>>> for v6.0-rc1, it's still 512/512
>>>
>>>> I will also send a separate patch for testing if you don't mind.
>>> sure! we are very glad that we could help.
>>
>> As you probably saw, I sent "[RFT PATCH] ata: libata: Set __ATA_BASE_SHT
>> max_sectors" for testing on top of v6.0-rc1, and I hope that then we can get
>> same performance as v5.19
> 
> yeah, our test confirmed your expectation:
> 
> stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec
> v5.19                 - 26.85
> v6.0-rc1              - 23.03
> v6.0-rc1 + your patch - 26.94

Thanks for testing Oliver. I pushed the fix and sent it out as an rc2 fix.

> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> John


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research