linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] improve buffered write performance with fgf order hint

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: <ex4uveapeddkvfwqmzzvyip5g4voij2jopwhypdpu7srswxzj6@wquolvtkeaxt>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 10:50:46 -0400
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@...kajraghav.com>
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@...hat.com>, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org, 
	willy@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] improve buffered write performance with fgf order
 hint

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 10:50:29AM +0000, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
> From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
> 
> Filesystems that support large folios can set the fgf order before
> buffered write(see XFS iomap_write_begin()) that can provide as a hint
> to page cache to allocate large folios, if possible.
> 
> The first patch is a minor cleanup.
> The second patch sets fgf order before starting the buffered write.
> 
> I tested the performance on Samsung SSD 990 pro on a system with 64GB
> RAM as follows:
> 
> $ bcachefs format -f /dev/nvme0n1;
> $ mount -t bcachefs /dev/nvme0n1 /mnt
> $ fio --name=bcachefs --filename=/mnt/test  --size=100G \
>     --ioengine=io_uring --iodepth=16 --rw=write --bs=128k
> 
> I measured the BW(MB/s) across three runs on 6.10-rc3:
> Before patches: 2730
> After patches: 3430 (1.25x boost)
> 
> With -o no_data_io mount option:
> Before patches: 2920
> After patches: 4630 (1.5x boost)
> 
> I was not able to test the patches with ktest due to some issue with
> debian(some broken package issue). Maybe Kent can run it in his CI while
> I try to fix ktest locally?

It's in my testing branch, results will be showing up here:
https://evilpiepirate.org/~testdashboard/ci?branch=bcachefs-testing