[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <028BF9CD-2E43-47DF-9373-A2D6EA7A3CF5@dilger.ca>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:16:04 -0600
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To: Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mbcache: Speed up cache entry creation
On Jul 23, 2019, at 10:01 PM, Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 10:56:05AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> Do you have any kind of performance metrics that show this is an actual
>> improvement in performance? This would be either macro-level benchmarks
>> (e.g. fio, but this seems unlikely to show any benefit), or micro-level
>> measurements (e.g. flame graph) that show a net reduction in CPU cycles,
>> lock contention, etc. in this part of the code.
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Here are some basic micro-benchmark results:
>
> Before:
> [ 3.162896] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 75
> [ 3.054701] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 78
> [ 3.152321] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 77
>
> After:
> [ 3.043380] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 68
> [ 3.194321] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 71
> [ 3.038100] mb_cache_entry_create: AVG cycles: 69
This information should be included in the patch description, since that
allows making a decision on whether the patch is worthwhile to land or not.
> The performance difference is probably more drastic when free memory is low,
> since an unnecessary call to kmem_cache_alloc() can result in a long wait for
> pages to be freed.
Cheers, Andreas
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (874 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists