Re: [xfs] ab23a77687: aim7.jobs-per-min -18.5% regression

[Dave Chinner]

On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:23:55PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi Dave Chinner,
> 
> we reported "[xfs]  6df693ed7b:  aim7.jobs-per-min -15.7% regression" as [1]
> when this change is still on
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/djwong/xfs-linux.git xfs-5.15-merge
> 
> now this change is on mainline.
> so we report again to highlight we still observe similar performance regression
> on mainline.
> 
> previously we also tried to test by turning off RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER per your
> guidance, but still observed similar regression, though we are not sure if our
> method to turn off RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER is enough. the detail result is in [2]
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210809064248.GB5761@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210818085248.GA28771@xsang-OptiPlex-9020/

Did you look at the config that was generated before running the
tests again?

> #
> # Automatically generated file; DO NOT EDIT.
> # Linux/x86_64 5.14.0-rc4 Kernel Configuration
> #
....
> CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW=y
> CONFIG_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
> CONFIG_RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
> CONFIG_LOCK_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
....


So these tests were still run with the same RWSEM_SPIN_ON_OWNER=y
configuration, and so unsurprisingly the result was the same with
spin contention on the directory inode rwsem.

You'll save yourself (and everyone else) a lot of time by validating
that your config changes are valid before re-running tests...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx