From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0EAD64A for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:56:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C9E1F862; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:56:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1649429785; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VcxLvlVCQO4rH2Xwy2B4XiLp12u0K/N6J1DwYp0BOz4=; b=DmaevUROaXjkghWhbFK7ZgcVlBIgSZm2DccHif0IYzBacnvVPnyDJYptN5XpP59/vLseO1 OUiwbX5F4VjIwqgoapCQ7pZlBkygGqgFDvJV7oCOHPvv+selT7qvD6uefySkPNfHWSqpE6 k1bsdsWl0mazTFfzPyYwBFrEHDCJ/cU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1649429785; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VcxLvlVCQO4rH2Xwy2B4XiLp12u0K/N6J1DwYp0BOz4=; b=dy4oginC1lZ7phDKwIki4GuKu+gkfE/C9XBnisHJf3rdXQak5y6wF7mFyhMbVMVxjQs/JM Iy4xOwH4Yye0R8BQ== Received: from ds.suse.cz (ds.suse.cz [10.100.12.205]) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0C3DA3B8A; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 14:56:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ds.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 10065) id E577ADA832; Fri, 8 Apr 2022 16:52:22 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 16:52:22 +0200 From: David Sterba To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Bruno Damasceno Freire , Chris Mason , Josef Bacik , David Sterba , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" , linux-btrfs , fdmanana@suse.com Subject: Re: [regression] 5.15 kernel triggering 100x more inode evictions Message-ID: <20220408145222.GR15609@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz Mail-Followup-To: dsterba@suse.cz, Thorsten Leemhuis , Bruno Damasceno Freire , Chris Mason , Josef Bacik , David Sterba , "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" , linux-btrfs , fdmanana@suse.com References: <07bb78be-1d58-7d88-288b-6516790f3b5d@leemhuis.info> <35b62998-e386-2032-5a7a-07e3413b3bc1@leemhuis.info> <9163b8a9-e852-5786-24fa-d324e3118890@leemhuis.info> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9163b8a9-e852-5786-24fa-d324e3118890@leemhuis.info> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 12:32:20PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. Top-posting for once, > to make this easily accessible to everyone. > > Btrfs maintainers, what's up here? Yes, this regression report was a bit > confusing in the beginning, but Bruno worked on it. And apparently it's > already fixed in 5.16, but still in 5.15. Is this caused by a change > that is to big to backport or something? I haven't identified possible fixes in 5.16 so I can't tell how much backport efforts it could be. As the report is related to performance on package updates, my best guess is that the patches fixing it are those from Filipe related to fsync/logging, and there are several of such improvements in 5.16. Or something else that fixes it indirectly.