[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29dec29c4a776db82406f272557f97cebabca963.camel@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:26:15 -0400
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
lkp@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
feng.tang@...el.com, fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [NFSD] 39d432fc76: fsmark.files_per_sec
-100.0% regression
On Thu, 2023-08-24 at 10:12 -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote:
> On 24 Aug 2023, at 9:23, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 01:59:06PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > hi, Chuck Lever,
> > >
> > > Fengwei (CCed) helped us review this astonishing finding by fsmark tests,
> > > and doubt below part:
> > > - nfsd4_end_grace(nn);
> > > + trace_nfsd_end_grace(netns(file));
> > >
> > > and confirmed if adding back:
> > > nfsd4_end_grace(nn);
> > >
> > > the regression is gone and files_per_sec restore to 61.93.
> >
> > As always, thanks for the report. However, this result is not
> > plausible. "end_grace" happens only once after a server reboot.
> >
> > Can you confirm that the NFS server kernel is not crashing
> > during the test?
>
> Does the removal of nfsd4_end_grace() here disable the ability of nfsdcltrack to
> terminate the grace period early on a first start of the server?
>
>
Yes. That should be the only effect (which is why we didn't notice it).
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists