linux-ext4 - Re: Discussion: is it time to remove dioread

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 15 Jan 2020 05:00:53 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Xiaoguang Wang <xiaoguang.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com, Liu Bo <bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: Discussion: is it time to remove dioread_nolock?



On 1/9/20 10:08 PM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 02:51:42PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>>> Dbench was slightly impacted; I didn't see any real differences with
>>> compilebench or postmark.  dioread_nolock did improve fio with
>>> sequential reads; which is interesting, since I would have expected
>>
>> IIUC, this Seq. read numbers are with --direct=1 & bs=2MB & ioengine=libaio,
>> correct?
>> So essentially it will do a DIO AIO sequential read.
> 
> Correct.

I too collected some performance numbers on my x86 box with
--direct=1, bs=4K/1M & ioengine=libaio, with default opt v/s 
dioread_nolock opt on latest ext4 git tree.

I found the delta to be within +/- 6% in all of the runs which includes, 
seq read, mixed rw & mixed randrw.

-ritesh