On 08.04.22 17:55, Filipe Manana wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 04:52:22PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: > > 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. > > So there's a lot of confusion in the thread, and the original openSUSE > bugzilla [1] is also a bit confusing and large to follow. Sorry for the confusion. It was not my intention. > Let me try to make it clear: > > [...] > > 4) What can be done, and was done in a recent patchset [2] (5.18-rc1), was > to make the behaviour on rename to not be so pessimistic, and instead > accurately determine if an inode was logged before or not, even if it was > recently evicted, and then skip log updates. > > The test scripts in the change logs of the patches of that patchset, > essentially mimic what was happening with the zypper package > installations/updates. Bruno's test script basically copies/integrates > those test scripts; I'm not sure if I understood why you are bringing out this last comparison. Your test scripts don't trigger the regression, which is fine since they were not made with this objective. If you look at my research (https://github.com/bdamascen0/s3e) you'll see that I clearly named you and your patches as my references. Anyway, thank you for having published them. > [...] > > This thread is also basically a revamp of an older thread [3]. > > [1] https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1193549 > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/cover.1642676248.git.fdmanana@xxxxxxxx/ > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/MN2PR20MB251235DDB741CD46A9DD5FAAD24E9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Yes, it is a revamp for a reason: - The older thread was 100% based on opensuse, rpm, tumbleweed kernels and tumbleweed rpm packages which is a hard selling point to attract any contribution. - OTOH, this thread has a simple script that anyone can run on any distribution to reproduce the regression and further research it. In my book, this is progress, even if its a tiny one. Regards, Bruno.
