linux-kernel - Re: Latest vfs scalability patch

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]

Message-ID: <20091015112329.GH4808@kryten>
Date:	Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:23:29 +1100
From:	Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: Latest vfs scalability patch

 
Hi Nick,

> I wonder what other good performance tests you can add to your test
> framework? creat/unlink is another easy one. And for each case, putting
> threads in their own cwd versus a common cwd are the variants.

I did try the two combinations of creat/unlink but haven't had a chance to
digest the profiles yet. I've attached them (taken at 64 cores, ie worst
case :)

In both cases performance was significantly better than mainline.

> BTW. for these cases in your tests it will be nice if you can run on
> ramfs because that will isolate purely the vfs. Perhaps also include
> other filesystems as you get time, but I think ramfs is the most
> useful for us to start with.

Good point. I'll add that into the setup scripts.

Anton

View attachment "open_unlink.profile" of type "text/plain" (10567 bytes)

View attachment "open_unlink_directories.profile" of type "text/plain" (12546 bytes)