On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 12:15:49PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: > __fsnotify_parent() has an optimization in place to avoid unneeded > take_dentry_name_snapshot(). When fsnotify_nameremove() was changed > not to call __fsnotify_parent(), we left out the optimization. > Kernel test robot reported a 5% performance regression in concurrent > unlink() workload. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@xxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190505062153.GG29809@shao2-debian/ > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20190104090357.GD22409@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > Fixes: 5f02a8776384 ("fsnotify: annotate directory entry modification events") > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Jan, > > The linked 5.1-rc1 performance regression report came with bad timing. > Not sure if Linus is planning an rc8. If not, you will probably not > see this before the 5.1 release and we shall have to queue it for 5.2 > and backport to stable 5.1. > > I crafted the patch so it applies cleanly both to master and Al's > for-next branch (there are some fsnotify changes in work.dcache). Charming... What about rename() and matching regressions there?
