On Monday 22 March 2010, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2010-03-21 at 21:30 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > of regressions introduced between 2.6.32 and 2.6.33. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > introduced between 2.6.32 and 2.6.33. Please verify if it still should > > be listed and let the tracking team know (either way). > > > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14950 > > Subject : tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1 > > Submitter : Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date : 2009-12-25 11:11 (87 days old) > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126174044213172&w=4 > > This needs retest in tip. I submitted some patchlets to shave a few > cycles, with which my box (fwtw) shows zero regression 2.6.31 -> > tip.today, whereas there was nothing but regression of up to ~6% in > between, magnitude seemingly depending on phase-of-moon. Actually, > patched tip at submission time was a fraction above 31 throughput. > Retesting today, it's a fraction of a percent below again (tbench is > annoyingly jittery). > > Hopefully, this tbench regression is on it's way to retirement. Thanks for the update. Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
