Re: 08ed4efad6: stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec -41.9% regression

2021-04-16 Thread Alexey Gladkov
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 01:44:43PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 1:32 AM kernel test robot > > wrote: > >> > >> FYI, we noticed a -41.9% regression of stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec due > >> to commit > >> 08ed4efad684 ("[PATCH v10 6/9]

Re: 08ed4efad6: stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec -41.9% regression

2021-04-08 Thread Eric W. Biederman
Linus Torvalds writes: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 1:32 AM kernel test robot > wrote: >> >> FYI, we noticed a -41.9% regression of stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec due to >> commit >> 08ed4efad684 ("[PATCH v10 6/9] Reimplement RLIMIT_SIGPENDING on top of >> ucounts") > > Ouch. We were cautiously

Re: 08ed4efad6: stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec -41.9% regression

2021-04-08 Thread Alexey Gladkov
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 09:22:40AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 1:32 AM kernel test robot > wrote: > > > > FYI, we noticed a -41.9% regression of stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec due to > > commit > > 08ed4efad684 ("[PATCH v10 6/9] Reimplement RLIMIT_SIGPENDING on top of

Re: 08ed4efad6: stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec -41.9% regression

2021-04-08 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 1:32 AM kernel test robot wrote: > > FYI, we noticed a -41.9% regression of stress-ng.sigsegv.ops_per_sec due to > commit > 08ed4efad684 ("[PATCH v10 6/9] Reimplement RLIMIT_SIGPENDING on top of > ucounts") Ouch. I *think* this test may be testing "send so many signals