hi, Shakeel,
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 11:28:10PM -0700, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 01:56:30PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > kernel test robot noticed a -11.9% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops on:
> >
> >
> > commit: 70a64b7919cbd6c12306051ff2825839a9d65605 ("memcg: dynamically allocate lruvec_stats")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> >
>
> Thanks for the report. Can you please run the same benchmark but with
> the full series (of 8 patches) or at least include the ff48c71c26aa
> ("memcg: reduce memory for the lruvec and memcg stats").
while this bisect, ff48c71c26aa has been checked. it has silimar data as
70a64b7919 (a little worse actually)
59142d87ab03b8ff 70a64b7919cbd6c12306051ff28 ff48c71c26aaefb090c108d8803
---------------- --------------------------- ---------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev
\ | \ | \
91713 -11.9% 80789 -13.2% 79612 will-it-scale.per_process_ops
ok, we will run tests on tip of the series which should be below if I understand
it correctly.
* a94032b35e5f9 memcg: use proper type for mod_memcg_state
>
> thanks,
> Shakeel
>
