From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754310AbaE1OUt (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2014 10:20:49 -0400 Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.145.42]:30320 "EHLO mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753310AbaE1OUs (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2014 10:20:48 -0400 Message-ID: <5385F0BB.7080406@fb.com> Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 08:20:43 -0600 From: Jens Axboe User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Hellwig CC: Subject: Re: blk-mq: refactor request allocation References: <1401217190-32453-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <5384FC60.1070103@fb.com> <20140528051919.GA21566@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20140528051919.GA21566@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [192.168.57.29] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.96,1.0.14,0.0.0000 definitions=2014-05-28_04:2014-05-28,2014-05-28,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=fb_default_notspam policy=fb_default score=0 kscore.is_bulkscore=1.08638653628645e-11 kscore.compositescore=0 circleOfTrustscore=0 compositescore=0.994525499955221 urlsuspect_oldscore=0.994525499955221 suspectscore=0 recipient_domain_to_sender_totalscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 kscore.is_spamscore=0 recipient_to_sender_totalscore=0 recipient_domain_to_sender_domain_totalscore=64355 rbsscore=0.994525499955221 spamscore=0 recipient_to_sender_domain_totalscore=0 urlsuspectscore=0.9 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1405280186 X-FB-Internal: deliver Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014-05-27 23:19, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 02:58:08PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 05/27/2014 12:59 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> This series streamlines the request allocation path. >>> >> >> Series looks innocuous enough to me, but it's about a 1.5% performance >> drop here with an actual device. These tests are very stable, anything >> over ~0.1% is definitely outside of noise. I repeated and rebooted a few >> times and tested both, it's persistent. No smoking guns in the profile. > > Can you do a bisect to narrow it down to one of the patches? Sure, I'll give it a whirl. -- Jens Axboe