DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 51MK6rZQ1630731
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results: delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 51MK6rZQ1630731
Authentication-Results: delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=Rfu0AWAj
X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 04B203858D3C
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1740254812;
	bh=GiZiILMpwLyIyqm8HLax+AlPjxY6LBrb2mDxmjrmXz4=;
	h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	 List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	 From;
	b=Rfu0AWAj8KYVx0hrgbbe59rwI1knF2yVJKeVgQ9XLM1zac9wptzFZxU+Sh5wU/nQd
	 Hcy7uz5RczLAC/bmnv9/ZPeWrT6pYCs/pXJ+wejs3JjiUzkufqY/tU0pfG/by69joA
	 TgAUvUjtILuoZR0LvzxRdarvlLt5gk3QfzZclbQo=
X-Original-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 202873858D1E
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2025 21:05:55 +0100
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [CALL FOR TESTING] Cygwin-3.6.0
Message-ID: <Z7ouIw8OTNS1arAT@calimero.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <Z7RUxWZt7iN9wxR1 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <aba49b13-6ae4-b9ed-298b-68c4887ee55e AT jdrake DOT com>
 <Z7mysSoCPc5tu1cB AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
 <7dc539c9-c4dc-085c-6691-f0fc97076246 AT jdrake DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7dc539c9-c4dc-085c-6691-f0fc97076246@jdrake.com>
X-BeenThere: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
 <mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From: Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender: "Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

On Feb 22 09:24, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2025, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote:
> 
> > On Feb 21 14:35, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin wrote:
> > > 2. This seems to have fixed a severe performance regression in Curl's test
> > > suite (https://github.com/curl/curl/pull/16217) that I was recently
> > > looking into.  My research tracked it down to c7fe29f ("Cygwin: pipe:
> > > Restore blocking mode of read pipe on close()/raw_read()"), reverting that
> > > got performance back to normal.  The fhandler/pipe.cc code changed
> > > significantly in master vs 3.5.
> >
> > This sounds a bit ambiguous to me.
> >
> > Do you see this performance regression with the latest 3.6.0 test
> > release, or does it fix this performance regression?
> 
> Sorry.  Regression introduced between 3.5.4 and 3.5.7 (we skipped 3.5.5
> and 3.5.6).  "Bisected" (really, educated guess found it on the first try)
> to c7fe29f.  Fixed in 3.6.0.

Great, thanks for clarifying!


Corinna

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple