From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2587C433F5 for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 15:02:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 2CC2A8D0003; Wed, 25 May 2022 11:02:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 27BA88D0001; Wed, 25 May 2022 11:02:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 169538D0003; Wed, 25 May 2022 11:02:36 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09C368D0001 for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 11:02:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A102A3576C for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 15:02:35 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79504581870.28.F70C5F3 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616741400A4 for ; Wed, 25 May 2022 15:02:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BA93619E0; Wed, 25 May 2022 15:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 741BCC385B8; Wed, 25 May 2022 15:02:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1653490953; bh=SopjZnEwL9dH67Z0H4heqgDTmhRTyXWQG5QAyoHE0Ks=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=dqhaUWLUxzSGjJpJsMwtqmlG16itKLnW9wbA6iR2gF9+08cUfegm+zUemDhThmfWZ t7GgemjxEVGO7Eb/8YJQTPO3DpcEQOxwAtMO34go1jStSynPAx5t4u0zSQN4rQJ11Z zqHdHaYzXXj1IACXKsuz+H0qpqbz8bk4+tDXAeXOQq6WFxcD6F3ouxdfjuaaomOZIz MnfgpYQLvk88jTykmegPZ3xndQgJioiE+tPPqao5eujkAZKs2hxh2SD9ts7N4U3INT mx8nyxM+2Y398PHkdfAd2o6lpEAq/GbeN6Lx+ovrdcmlHga97u43zbdhBvmmu3c7MU x21MNhRCZrDlg== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 116B45C018D; Wed, 25 May 2022 08:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 08:02:33 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Stefan Wahren , Marcelo Tosatti , Andrew Morton , Nicolas Saenz Julienne , Borislav Petkov , Minchan Kim , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Juri Lelli , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Linux ARM , Phil Elwell , regressions@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: vchiq: Performance regression since 5.18-rc1 Message-ID: <20220525150233.GX1790663@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <77d6d498-7dd9-03eb-60f2-d7e682bb1b20@i2se.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: imf23.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=dqhaUWLU; spf=pass (imf23.hostedemail.com: domain of "SRS0=mIkQ=WB=paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home=paulmck@kernel.org" designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="SRS0=mIkQ=WB=paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home=paulmck@kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: gzy9mdcbgb79g44c97xrjggzwf46mfm9 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 616741400A4 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-HE-Tag: 1653490933-824553 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 04:26:27PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 2022-05-25 16:07:47 [+0200], Stefan Wahren wrote: > > this was the same as Paul send. I think i need more time for investigation, > > maybe there is an issue with the application. > > I haven't seen Paul referring to *that* patch. He pointed to some fs/ > related changes. True! Both patches changed from a synchronize_rcu() to a synchronize_rcu_expedited(), but different instances of synchronize_rcu(). Thanx, Paul