[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALvZod4CD+O7-ynGAHU-6vxE6CbSmuQei1=SVJsx0zFfQdmV2g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2022 09:18:28 -0800
From: Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>
To: kernel test robot <yujie.liu@...el.com>
Cc: oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, lkp@...el.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
feng.tang@...el.com, zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com,
fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master] [mm] f1a7941243: unixbench.score -5.1% regression
On Sun, Dec 4, 2022 at 9:56 PM kernel test robot <yujie.liu@...el.com> wrote:
>
> Greeting,
>
> FYI, we noticed a -5.1% regression of unixbench.score due to commit:
>
[...]
> 9cd6ffa60256e931 f1a7941243c102a44e8847e3b94
> ---------------- ---------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 7917 -5.1% 7509 unixbench.score
What is unixbench.score?
> 10485 -12.1% 9216 unixbench.time.maximum_resident_set_size
> 37236706 -5.1% 35324104 unixbench.time.minor_page_faults
For above two, is negative change good or bad?
> 0.98 ą 20% +0.7 1.64 ą 38% perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.link_path_walk.path_openat.do_filp_open.do_sys_openat2.__x64_sys_openat
> 2.12 ą 19% +0.8 2.96 ą 13% perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.handle_mm_fault.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault
> 2.35 ą 13% +0.9 3.28 ą 13% perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.__handle_mm_fault.handle_mm_fault.do_user_addr_fault.exc_page_fault.asm_exc_page_fault
> 0.14 ą 74% +0.4 0.55 ą 32% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.do_task_dead
> 0.04 ą223% +0.4 0.47 ą 49% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__mmdrop
Also how should I interpret the above perf-profiles?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists