linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] /dev/zero: also implement ->read

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: <f2e9c57db2b548949e6bd570a6dc3c5d@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Sun, 6 Sep 2020 20:52:31 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Christophe Leroy' <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
CC:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] /dev/zero: also implement ->read

From: Christophe Leroy
> Sent: 06 September 2020 19:36
> Hi,
> 
> Le 06/09/2020 à 20:21, Pavel Machek a écrit :
> > Hi!
> >
> >>>> Christophe reported a major speedup due to avoiding the iov_iter
> >>>> overhead, so just add this trivial function.  Note that /dev/zero
> >>>> already implements both an iter and non-iter writes so this just
> >>>> makes it more symmetric.
> >>>>
> >>>> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
> >>>
> >>> Tested-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
> >>
> >> Any idea what has happened to make the 'iter' version so bad?
> >
> > Exactly. Also it would be nice to note how the speedup was measured
> > and what the speedup is.
> >
> 
> Was measured on an 8xx powerpc running at 132MHz with:
> 
> 	dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null count=1M
> 
> With the patch, dd displays a throughput of 113.5MB/s
> Without the patch it is 99.9MB/s

That in itself isn't a problem.
What was the throughput before any of these patches?

I just remember another thread about the same test running
a lot slower after one of the related changes.
While this speeds up read /dev/zero (which is uncommon)
if this is needed to get near the old performance then
the changes to the 'iter' code will affect real workloads.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)