All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, ying.huang@intel.com,
	feng.tang@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PCI/MSI]  77e89afc25:  will-it-scale.per_process_ops -2.6% regression
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 11:07:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210901030739.GE14661@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87eeaf3khx.ffs@tglx>

Hi Thomas,

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18 2021 at 22:51, kernel report robot wrote:
> 
> > Greeting,
> >
> > FYI, we noticed a -2.6% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
> >
> >
> > commit: 77e89afc25f30abd56e76a809ee2884d7c1b63ce ("PCI/MSI: Protect msi_desc::masked for multi-MSI")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> >
> >
> > in testcase: will-it-scale
> > on test machine: 128 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6338 CPU @ 2.00GHz with 256G memory
> > with following parameters:
> >
> > 	nr_task: 100%
> > 	mode: process
> > 	test: lseek2
> > 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> > 	ucode: 0xd000280
> >
> > test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> > test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
> >
> > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> 
> There is nothing to fix. The commit cures an incorrectness. Comparing
> buggy code to correct code is futile.

Got it! the change is a functionality fix. Thanks for information.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PCI/MSI] 77e89afc25: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -2.6% regression
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2021 11:07:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210901030739.GE14661@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87eeaf3khx.ffs@tglx>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1385 bytes --]

Hi Thomas,

On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18 2021 at 22:51, kernel report robot wrote:
> 
> > Greeting,
> >
> > FYI, we noticed a -2.6% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
> >
> >
> > commit: 77e89afc25f30abd56e76a809ee2884d7c1b63ce ("PCI/MSI: Protect msi_desc::masked for multi-MSI")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> >
> >
> > in testcase: will-it-scale
> > on test machine: 128 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6338 CPU @ 2.00GHz with 256G memory
> > with following parameters:
> >
> > 	nr_task: 100%
> > 	mode: process
> > 	test: lseek2
> > 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> > 	ucode: 0xd000280
> >
> > test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> > test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
> >
> > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> 
> There is nothing to fix. The commit cures an incorrectness. Comparing
> buggy code to correct code is futile.

Got it! the change is a functionality fix. Thanks for information.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-01  2:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-18 14:51 [PCI/MSI] 77e89afc25: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -2.6% regression kernel report robot
2021-08-18 14:51 ` kernel report robot
2021-08-26 22:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-08-26 22:32   ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-09-01  3:07   ` Oliver Sang [this message]
2021-09-01  3:07     ` Oliver Sang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210901030739.GE14661@xsang-OptiPlex-9020 \
    --to=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.