Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan] 5e56dfbd83: fsmark.files_per_sec -11.1% regression

From	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan] 5e56dfbd83: fsmark.files_per_sec -11.1% regression
Date	2017-01-24 14:50 +0100
Message-ID	<t39DY-4W7-39@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<t2BCh-8lT-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon 23-01-17 09:26:44, kernel test robot wrote:
> 
> Greeting,
> 
> FYI, we noticed a -11.1% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec due to commit:
> 
> 
> commit: 5e56dfbd837421b7fa3c6c06018c6701e2704917 ("mm, vmscan: consider eligible zones in get_scan_count")
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master

This is more than unexpected. This patch should be basically noop for
anything but CONFIG_HIGHMEM systems. And your config says this is 64b
kernel. Are those results reproducible? And could you try to compare
perf profiles before and after the patch.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan]  5e56dfbd83:  fsmark.files_per_sec  -11.1% regression Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-01-24 14:50 +0100
  Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan]  5e56dfbd83:  fsmark.files_per_sec  -11.1% regression Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com> - 2017-01-25 05:30 +0100
    Re: [lkp-robot] [mm, vmscan]  5e56dfbd83:  fsmark.files_per_sec  -11.1% regression Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-01-26 10:20 +0100

csiph-web