Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [hugetlbfs] c0d0381ade: vm-scalability.throughput
 -33.4% regression
To:     Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com>,
        kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        "Kirill A.Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Prakash Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@oracle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, lkp@lists.01.org
References: <20200622005551.GK5535@shao2-debian>
 <e140ec78-1fbd-73e2-7a11-7db3b714874d@oracle.com>
 <718e1653-b273-096b-0ee3-f720cf794612@oracle.com>
 <d945497d-0edb-f540-33e1-8b1ba1e20f62@linux.intel.com>
 <691152ef-6787-9598-4445-fd2a0164f70f@oracle.com>
 <1f6d321e-96b4-18c3-2991-d6a2e94c9e60@oracle.com>
 <68992a81-a1b9-467b-59c4-48ab65c601c5@linux.intel.com>
 <7540556c-1e07-51b2-d903-829a887ef5b6@oracle.com>
 <4c95b307-90b5-798f-34c1-000ea5331ebb@linux.intel.com>
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <a44417ad-ad5c-aab6-d656-badd4cfad60e@oracle.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 20:01:12 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4c95b307-90b5-798f-34c1-000ea5331ebb@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/12/20 6:59 PM, Xing Zhengjun wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/13/2020 1:40 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
>> On 10/11/20 10:29 PM, Xing Zhengjun wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>>     I re-test it in v5.9-rc8, the regression still existed. It is almost the same as 34ae204f1851. Do you have time to look at it? Thanks.
>>>
>>
>> Thank you for testing.
>>
>> Just curious, did you apply the series in this thread or just test v5.9-rc8?
>> If just testing v5.9-rc8, no changes to this code were added after 34ae204f1851,
>> so results being the same are expected.
>>
> 
> I just test v5.9-rc8. Where can I find the series patches you mentioned here? Or just wait for the next mainline release?
> 

My apologies.  I missed that you were not cc'ed on this thred:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200706202615.32111-1-mike.kravetz@oracle.com/

As mentioned, there will likely be another revision to the way locking is
handled.  The new scheme will try to consider performance as is done in
the above link.  I suggest you wait for next revision.  If you do not mind,
I will cc you when the new code is posted.
-- 
Mike Kravetz