linux-kernel - RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 9/9] f2fs: update extent tree in batches

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:	Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:45:53 +0800
From:	Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
To:	'Jaegeuk Kim' <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 9/9] f2fs: update extent tree in batches

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chao Yu [mailto:chao2.yu@...sung.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 5:34 PM
> To: 'Jaegeuk Kim'
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 9/9] f2fs: update extent tree in batches
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chao Yu [mailto:chao2.yu@...sung.com]
> > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 8:55 PM
> > To: 'Jaegeuk Kim'
> > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 9/9] f2fs: update extent tree in batches
> >
> > Hi Jaegeuk,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 1:48 AM
> > > To: Chao Yu
> > > Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] f2fs: update extent tree in batches
> > >
> > > Hi Chao,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 07:21:48PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > This patch introduce a new helper f2fs_update_extent_tree_range
> > > > which can update extent nodes in extent tree in batches.
> > > >
> > > > Now, we use the function to invalidate blocks in batches instead of
> > > > invalidating them one by one when truncating blocks.
> > >
> > > IMO, it's not clear the benefit of this patch in terms of performance and code
> > > readability versus risky code changes.
> >
> > This is only used in truncate path, IMO, in theory, we can gain benefit from
> > this batch mode operation when truncating frequently.
> >
> > I will test the patch for numbers.
> 
> Since in batched operation is only used in truncation path, I only stat data
> in that path. And I add below function to test for stating time count.
> 
> uint64_t rdtsc(void)
> {
> 	uint32_t lo, hi;
> 	__asm__ __volatile__ ("rdtsc" : "=a" (lo), "=d" (hi));
> 	return (uint64_t)hi << 32 | lo;
> }
> 
> My test environment is: ubuntu, intel i7-3770, 16G memory, 256g micron ssd.
> 

Sorry, it's out of format.

a) Removing 128MB file which has one extent node mapping whole range of file:
1. dd if=/dev/zero  of=/mnt/f2fs/128M bs=1M count=128
2. sync
3. rm /mnt/f2fs/128M
				count		total		average
f2fs_update_extent_tree_range	33		3321		100.63
f2fs_update_extent_cache	32768		7651022		233.49

b) fsstress:
fsstress -d /mnt/f2fs -l 5 -n 100 -p 20
				count		total		average
f2fs_update_extent_tree_range	1868		1073762		574.82
f2fs_update_extent_cache	31518		11495827	364.74

Thanks,

--
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/