linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Carel Si <beibei.si@intel.com>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkp@lists.01.org, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	fengwei.yin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [fget] 054aa8d439: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.7% regression
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:37:49 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjsTk2jym66RYkK9kuq8zOXTd2bWPiOq43-iCF6Qy-xQQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211213083154.GA20853@linux.intel.com>

On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 12:34 AM Carel Si <beibei.si@intel.com> wrote:
>
> We tested your patch, the performance regression has recovered from -5.7% to
> -0.4%, thanks.

Thanks for testing.

That probably means that the cost was literally mostly the overhead of
function call/exit, and now that it's simple enough for gcc to inline,
it went back to being equivalent to the old leaf-function overhead.

I also suspect that it means that the benchmark is likely not great (I
didn't look at details - I assume it's literally a microbenchmark just
doing a very tight poll() loop in multiple threads), but hey, that's
not all that uncommon.

And I do think the resulting code after this patch is better (in
organization, in comments, and obviously in code generation), so maybe
the benchmark isn't great, maybe this case doesn't matter all that
much in reality, but the end result is better for it.

So I'll just apply the patch. Thanks for the report and the testing
(including testing the one-liner that didn't help).

           Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-13 18:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-10  5:37 [fget] 054aa8d439: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.7% regression kernel test robot
2021-12-10 18:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-10 20:29   ` Jann Horn
2021-12-10 21:25     ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-10 21:59       ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-10 23:29         ` Jann Horn
2021-12-11  1:01           ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-11  1:32         ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-13  8:31         ` [LKP] " Carel Si
2021-12-13 18:37           ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-12-13 19:44             ` Linus Torvalds
2021-12-15 12:54               ` Greg KH
2021-12-13 10:57   ` Carel Si

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='CAHk-=wjsTk2jym66RYkK9kuq8zOXTd2bWPiOq43-iCF6Qy-xQQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=beibei.si@intel.com \
    --cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mszeredi@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).