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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sat, 21 Oct 2023 08:19:34 +0800 (CST)
From:   "David Wang" <00107082@....com>
To:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PERFORMANCE]fs: sendfile suffer performance degradation when
 buffer size have performance impact on underling IO

Hi, 

I was trying to confirm the performance improvement via replacing read/write sequences with sendfile, 
But I got quite a surprising result:

$ gcc -DUSE_SENDFILE cp.cpp
$ time ./a.out 

real	0m56.121s
user	0m0.000s
sys	0m4.844s

$ gcc  cp.cpp
$ time ./a.out 

real	0m27.363s
user	0m0.014s
sys	0m4.443s

The result show that, in my test scenario,  the read/write sequences only use half of the time by sendfile.
My guess is that sendfile using a default pipe with buffer size 1<<16 (16 pages), which is not tuned for the underling IO, 
hence a read/write sequences with buffer size 1<<17 is much faster than sendfile.

But the problem with sendfile is that there is no parameter to tune the buffer size from userspace...Any chance to fix this?

The test code is as following:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/sendfile.h>
#include <fcntl.h>

char buf[1<<17];   // much better than 1<<16
int main() {
	int i, fin, fout, n, m;
	for (i=0; i<128; i++) {
		// dd if=/dev/urandom of=./bigfile bs=131072 count=256
		fin  = open("./bigfile", O_RDONLY);
		fout = open("./target", O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | O_DSYNC, S_IWUSR);
#ifndef USE_SENDFILE 
		while(1) {
			n = read(fin, buf, sizeof(buf));
			if (n==0) break;
			m = write(fout, buf, n);
			if (n != m) {
				printf("fail to write, expect %d, actual %d\n", n, m);
				perror(":");
				return 1;
			}
		}
#else
		off_t offset = 0;
		struct stat st;
		if (fstat(fin, &st) != 0) {
			perror("fail to fstat\n");
			return 1;
		}
		sendfile(fout, fin, &offset, st.st_size);

#endif
		close(fin);
		close(fout);

	}
	return 0;
}

FYI
David

Powered by blists - more mailing lists