linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Allow increasing the buffer-head per-CPU LRU size

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 8 Jul 2014 08:28:12 +0200
From:	Sebastien Buisson <sebastien.buisson@...l.net>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	<viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow increasing the buffer-head per-CPU LRU size


>> Can anyone demonstrate why we shouldn't just do
>
> I was assuming due to memory usage: with 4K blocks 32K->64K
>

Moreover, performance gain was not that satisfactory on ext4 when 
increasing BH_LRU_SIZE to 16.
Here are the performances I got with:
(a) mdtest on ramdisk device, single shared dir, with large ACL and SELinux
(b) mdtest on ramdisk device, single shared dir, with large ACL but NO 
SELinux

(results show performance gain in percentage when increasing BH_LRU_SIZE 
to 16)

(a)
files       tasks     dir size     Creation   Stat     Removal
1000000      1     	  0          -8,7        -2,7     -0,5
1000000      1       100000          -5,2        -0,5     -1,1
1000000      1       500000          -5,1        -3,7     -1,5
1000000      1      2000000          -5,1        -4,0     -8,5
1000000      1      5000000          -4,2        -5,3     -10,2
1000000      1     10000000          -3,5        -8,0     -10,9
1000000      8            0          -0,3        -3,8     -1,2
1000000      8       100000          -1,2        -3,7     -1,5
1000000      8       500000           0,5        -3,2     -5,3
1000000      8      2000000          -1,7        -6,1     -8,7
1000000      8      5000000          -5,9        -7,7     -11,9
1000000      8     10000000          -4,1        -8,8     -13,6

(b)
files      tasks     dir size     Creation   Stat     Removal
1000000      1           0            0,0        -0,9     -1,1
1000000      1      100000            1,0        -3,0     -3,5
1000000      1      500000            3,7        -3,0     -2,4
1000000      1     2000000            1,1         3,6     -0,2
1000000      1     5000000            3,5         0,1      5,9
1000000      1    10000000            9,0         3,8      6,4
1000000      8           0            2,4        -1,2     -4,3
1000000      8      100000           -0,2        -1,8     -2,4
1000000      8      500000            1,1        -0,3      2,0
1000000      8     2000000           -0,3        -2,8     -3,3
1000000      8     5000000            0,3        -3,1     -1,3
1000000      8    10000000            1,5         0,0      0,7


To compare with the performances I got on Lustre with:
(c) mds-survey on ramdisk device, quota enabled, shared directory
(d) mds-survey on ramdisk device, quota enabled, directory per process

(c)
fi         dir     threads     create   lookup   destroy
1000000     1        1          11,3      1,2      7,2
1000000     1        2           6,4      2,3      6,9
1000000     1        4           1,9      3,0      1,3
1000000     1        8          -0,6      4,3      0,7
1000000     1       16           0,5      4,4      0,6

(d)
files      dir     threads     create   lookup   destroy
1000000     4       4            3,2     28,5      5,3
1000000     8       8            1,2     33,9      2,0
1000000    16      16            0,6      7,9     -0,2


Sebastien.
--
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/