> ; natechancel...@gmail.com
> ; ndesaulni...@google.com
> ; clang-built-li...@googlegroups.com
> ; rost...@goodmis.org
> ; Rajender M ; Yiu Cho Lau
> ; Peter Jonasson ; Venkatesh
> Rajaram
> Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux
lt-li...@googlegroups.com; rost...@goodmis.org; Rajender M; Yiu Cho
> Lau; Peter Jonasson; Venkatesh Rajaram
> Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
>
> On 11/20/20 at 03:11am, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> > Hi Baoquan,
> >
>
On 11/20/20 at 03:11am, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
>
> To which commit should we apply the draft patch. We tried applying
> the patch to the commit 3e4fb4346c781068610d03c12b16c0cfb0fd24a3
> (the one we used for applying the previous patch) but it fails.
I tested on 5.10-rc3+. You can a
"boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
On 11/03/20 at 12:34pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> >> So, you mean with the draft patch applied, the initial performance
> regression goes away, just many page corruption errors with call trace
> are seen, right?
>
> Yes, that'
On 11/03/20 at 12:34pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> >> So, you mean with the draft patch applied, the initial performance
> regression goes away, just many page corruption errors with call trace
> are seen, right?
>
> Yes, that's right.
>
> >> And the performance regression is about 2sec delay in
>
On 11/03/20 at 12:34pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> >> So, you mean with the draft patch applied, the initial performance
> regression goes away, just many page corruption errors with call trace
> are seen, right?
>
> Yes, that's right.
>
> >> And the performance regression is about 2sec delay in
>
u; Peter Jonasson; Venkatesh Rajaram
Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
On 11/02/20 at 02:15pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
>
> There could still be some memory initialization problem with
> the draft patch. I see a lot of
ck.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> a...@linux-foundation.org; natechancel...@gmail.com; ndesaulni...@google.com;
> clang-built-li...@googlegroups.com; rost...@goodmis.org; Rajender M; Yiu Cho
> Lau; Peter Jonasson; Venkatesh Rajaram
> Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time&
rost...@goodmis.org; Rajender M; Yiu Cho
Lau; Peter Jonasson; Venkatesh Rajaram
Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
Hi Baoquan,
>> Can you tell how you measure the boot time?
Our test is actually boothalt, time reported by this test
incl
h
Rajaram
Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Kernel
Hi Rahul,
On 10/20/20 at 03:26pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> >> Here, do you mean it even cost more time with the patch applied?
>
> Yes, we ran it multiple times and i
Hi Rahul,
On 10/20/20 at 03:26pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> >> Here, do you mean it even cost more time with the patch applied?
>
> Yes, we ran it multiple times and it looks like there is a
> very minor increase with the patch.
>
..
> On 10/20/20 at 01:45pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> > Hi B
el.org
; a...@linux-foundation.org
; natechancel...@gmail.com
; ndesaulni...@google.com ;
clang-built-li...@googlegroups.com ;
rost...@goodmis.org ; Rajender M ; Yiu
Cho Lau ; Peter Jonasson ; Venkatesh
Rajaram
Subject: Re: Performance regressions in "boot_time" tests in Linux 5.8 Ke
---
>
> We have attached default dmesg logs and also dmesg logs collected with
> memblock=debug kernel cmdline for both vanilla and patched kernels. Let me
> know if you need more info.
>
>
>
> From: b...@redhat.com
> Sent: 13 October 2020 6:47
Hi Rahul,
On 10/12/20 at 05:21pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
>
> Attached collected dmesg logs for with and without
> commit after adding memblock=debug to kernel cmdline.
Can you test below draft patch and see if it works for you?
>From a2ea6caef3c73ad9efb2dd2b48039065fe430bb2 Mon S
On 10/12/20 at 05:21pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> Hi Baoquan,
>
> Attached collected dmesg logs for with and without
> commit after adding memblock=debug to kernel cmdline.
Thanks, I have got the root cause, will make a patch for your testing
soon.
On 10/09/20 at 01:15pm, Rahul Gopakumar wrote:
> As part of VMware's performance regression testing for Linux Kernel
> upstream releases, we identified boot time increase when comparing
> Linux 5.8 kernel against Linux 5.7 kernel. Increase in boot time is
> noticeable on VM with a **large amount of
As part of VMware's performance regression testing for Linux Kernel
upstream releases, we identified boot time increase when comparing
Linux 5.8 kernel against Linux 5.7 kernel. Increase in boot time is
noticeable on VM with a **large amount of memory**.
In our test cases, it's noticeable with me
17 matches
Mail list logo
