[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiCJtLbFWNURB34b9a_R_unaH3CiMRXfkR0-iihB_z68A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 15:20:58 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
lkp@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, gfs2@...ts.linux.dev,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, ying.huang@...el.com, feng.tang@...el.com,
fengwei.yin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [file] 0ede61d858: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
-2.9% regression
On Sun, 26 Nov 2023 at 12:23, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> IOW, I might have messed up some "trivial cleanup" when prepping for
> sending it out...
Bah. Famous last words. One of the "trivial cleanups" made the code
more "obvious" by renaming the nospec mask as just "mask".
And that trivial rename broke that patch *entirely*, because now that
name shadowed the "fmode_t" mask argument.
Don't even ask how long it took me to go from "I *tested* this,
dammit, now it doesn't work at all" to "Oh God, I'm so stupid".
So that nobody else would waste any time on this, attached is a new
attempt. This time actually tested *after* the changes.
Linus
View attachment "0001-Improve-__fget_files_rcu-code-generation-and-thus-__.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (5014 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists