Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
        Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
        Kingdom.
        Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From:   David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20231117113549.GBZVdQFQ7VrfsPd9mV@fat_crate.local>
References: <20231117113549.GBZVdQFQ7VrfsPd9mV@fat_crate.local> <20231116154406.GDZVY4xmFvRQt0wGGE@fat_crate.local> <202311061616.cd495695-oliver.sang@intel.com> <3865842.1700061614@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <CAHk-=whM-cEwAsLtKsf5dYwV7nDTaRv1bUKLVBstMAQBug24uQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wjCUckvZUQf7gqp2ziJUWxVpikM_6srFdbcNdBJTxExRg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wjhs6uuedgz-7HbcPtirEq+vvjJBY-M2zyteJwBhOMZhg@mail.gmail.com> <20231115190938.GGZVUXcuUjI3i1JRAB@fat_crate.local> <CAHk-=wh0TcXyGmKHfs+Xe=5Sd5bNn=NNV9CEtOy_tbyHAAmk9g@mail.gmail.com> <232440.1700153046@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     dhowells@redhat.com,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
        oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>, ying.huang@intel.com,
        feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [iov_iter] c9eec08bac: vm-scalability.throughput -16.9% regression
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <864269.1700230337.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:12:17 +0000
Message-ID: <864270.1700230337@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:

> Hmm, stupid question: are those results better than without that
> oneliner?

Without any changes, I see something like:

 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec: avg 3185 uS, stddev 19 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec: avg 3186 uS, stddev 9 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec: avg 3244 uS, stddev 153 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec_split: avg 3397 uS, stddev 16 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec_split: avg 3400 uS, stddev 16 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_bvec_split: avg 3402 uS, stddev 34 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_kvec: avg 2818 uS, stddev 550 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_kvec: avg 2906 uS, stddev 21 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_kvec: avg 2923 uS, stddev 1496 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray: avg 3564 uS, stddev 6 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray: avg 3573 uS, stddev 17 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray: avg 3575 uS, stddev 58 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray_to_bvec: avg 3929 uS, stddev 9 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray_to_bvec: avg 3930 uS, stddev 6 uS
 iov_kunit_benchmark_xarray_to_bvec: avg 3930 uS, stddev 7 uS

David