[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130711020012.GA5652@dastard>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 12:00:12 +1000
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Paul Taysom <taysom@...omium.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jack@...e.cz, sonnyrao@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: sync: fixed performance regression
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 04:12:36PM -0700, Paul Taysom wrote:
> The following commit introduced a 10x regression for
> syncing inodes in ext4 with relatime enabled where just
> the atime had been modified.
>
> commit 4ea425b63a3dfeb7707fc7cc7161c11a51e871ed
> Author: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
> Date: Tue Jul 3 16:45:34 2012 +0200
> vfs: Avoid unnecessary WB_SYNC_NONE writeback during sys_sync and reorder sync passes
>
> See also: http://www.kernelhub.org/?msg=93100&p=2
>
> Fixed by putting back in the call to writeback_inodes_sb.
>
> I'll attach the test in a reply to this e-mail.
>
> The test starts by creating 512 files, syncing, reading one byte
> from each of those files, syncing, and then deleting each file
> and syncing. The time to do each sync is printed. The process
> is then repeated for 1024 files and then the next power of
> two up to 262144 files.
>
> Note, when running the test, the slow down doesn't always happen
> but most of the tests will show a slow down.
Can you please check if the patch attached to this mail:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137276874025813&w=2
Fixes your problem?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists