Hi Mukesh, I built 7.2-rc4 from source with your proposed rcu_ct_kernel_exit_qs() patch and re-ran the same sweep - it shows minor improvements vs. stock 7.2-rc4
Full results, median bogo-ops/sec over 15 runs each: Mode 7.1 7.2-rc4 7.2-rc4+patch Enforcing 68,275 70,154 71,585 Permissive 68,082 67,166 68,705 Disabled 99,654 100,510 101,016 The patch vs. stock 7.2-rc4 differences (+4.8%/+0.9%/+1.3%) are hard to distinquish from run-to-run noise we've been seeing on this hardware, but they are consistent. I think it's a useful efficiency improvement on its own merits, as it does avoid the unconditional rcu_preempt_deferred_qs() call on the common fast path. Even with only small performance gains, the change looks correct and low-risk to me, and I'd like to see it land in mainline. Let me know if there's anything else you'd like me to test before you post it, or if it's already queued up separately from this thread. Thank you! Jirka On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 7:12 AM Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 09:58:59PM +0200, Jirka Hladky wrote: > > Oh, I forgot to add the actual results from the LPAR: > > > > Model name: POWER10 (architected), altivec supported > > Model: 2.0 (pvr 0080 0200) > > Type : Dedicated > > Mode : Capped > > Entitled Capacity : 1.00 > > Memory Mode : Dedicated > > > > Results (median bogo-ops/sec, N=15 per cell): > > Mode 7.1 7.2-rc4 Delta > > Enforcing 68,275 70,154 +2.7% > > Permissive 68,082 67,166 -1.3% > > Disabled 99,654 100,510 +0.9% > > > [...] > Hey Jirka, > > Thanks for confirming. Also with the diff I shared, did you see any > difference in the performance. > > Regards, > Mukesh > > -- -Jirka
