All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Lockless page cache test results
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:46:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060426194623.GD9211@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <444F8714.9060808@yahoo.com.au>

On Thu, Apr 27 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Running a splice benchmark on a 4-way IPF box, I decided to give the
> >lockless page cache patches from Nick a spin. I've attached the results
> >as a png, it pretty much speaks for itself.
> >
> >The test in question splices a 1GiB file to a pipe and then splices that
> >to some output. Normally that output would be something interesting, in
> >this case it's simply /dev/null. So it tests the input side of things
> >only, which is what I wanted to do here. To get adequate runtime, the
> >operation is repeated a number of times (120 in this example). The
> >benchmark does that number of loops with 1, 2, 3, and 4 clients each
> >pinned to a private CPU. The pinning is mainly done for more stable
> >results.
> 
> Thanks Jens!
> 
> It's interesting, single threaded performance is down a little. Is
> this significant? In some other results you showed me with 3 splices
> each running on their own file (ie. no tree_lock contention), lockless
> looked slightly faster on the same machine.

I can't say for sure, as I haven't done enough of these runs to know for
a fact if it's just a little fluctuation or actually statistically
significant. The tests are quick to run, I'll do a series of single
thread runs tomorrow to tell you.

> It could well be that the speculative get_page operation is naturally
> a bit slower on Itanium CPUs -- there is a different mix of barriers,
> reads, writes, etc. If only someone gave me an IPF system... ;)

I'll gladly trade the heat and noise generation of that beast with you
:-)

I can do the same numbers on a 2-way em64t for comparison, that should
get us a little better coverage.

> As you said, it would be nice to see how this goes when the other end
> are 4 gigabit pipes or so... And then things like specweb and file
> serving workloads.

Yes, for now I just consider the /dev/null splicing an extremely fast
and extremely light weigth interconnect :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: Lockless page cache test results
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:46:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060426194623.GD9211@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <444F8714.9060808@yahoo.com.au>

On Thu, Apr 27 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Running a splice benchmark on a 4-way IPF box, I decided to give the
> >lockless page cache patches from Nick a spin. I've attached the results
> >as a png, it pretty much speaks for itself.
> >
> >The test in question splices a 1GiB file to a pipe and then splices that
> >to some output. Normally that output would be something interesting, in
> >this case it's simply /dev/null. So it tests the input side of things
> >only, which is what I wanted to do here. To get adequate runtime, the
> >operation is repeated a number of times (120 in this example). The
> >benchmark does that number of loops with 1, 2, 3, and 4 clients each
> >pinned to a private CPU. The pinning is mainly done for more stable
> >results.
> 
> Thanks Jens!
> 
> It's interesting, single threaded performance is down a little. Is
> this significant? In some other results you showed me with 3 splices
> each running on their own file (ie. no tree_lock contention), lockless
> looked slightly faster on the same machine.

I can't say for sure, as I haven't done enough of these runs to know for
a fact if it's just a little fluctuation or actually statistically
significant. The tests are quick to run, I'll do a series of single
thread runs tomorrow to tell you.

> It could well be that the speculative get_page operation is naturally
> a bit slower on Itanium CPUs -- there is a different mix of barriers,
> reads, writes, etc. If only someone gave me an IPF system... ;)

I'll gladly trade the heat and noise generation of that beast with you
:-)

I can do the same numbers on a 2-way em64t for comparison, that should
get us a little better coverage.

> As you said, it would be nice to see how this goes when the other end
> are 4 gigabit pipes or so... And then things like specweb and file
> serving workloads.

Yes, for now I just consider the /dev/null splicing an extremely fast
and extremely light weigth interconnect :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2006-04-26 19:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-26 13:53 Lockless page cache test results Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 14:43 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 14:43   ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 19:46   ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2006-04-26 19:46     ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  5:39     ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-04-27  5:39       ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-04-27  6:07       ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  6:07         ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  6:15       ` Andi Kleen
2006-04-27  6:15         ` Andi Kleen
2006-04-27  7:51         ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-04-27  7:51           ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-04-26 16:55 ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 16:55   ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 17:42   ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 17:42     ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 18:10     ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 18:10       ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 18:23       ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 18:23         ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 18:46         ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 18:46           ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 19:21           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 19:21             ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  5:58           ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  5:58             ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 18:34       ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-26 18:34         ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-26 18:47         ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 18:47           ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 18:48           ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-26 18:48             ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-26 18:49           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 18:49             ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 20:31             ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-26 20:31               ` Christoph Lameter
2006-04-28 14:01               ` David Chinner
2006-04-28 14:01                 ` David Chinner
2006-04-28 14:10                 ` David Chinner
2006-04-28 14:10                   ` David Chinner
2006-04-30  9:49                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-30 11:20                   ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-30 11:20                     ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-30 11:39                   ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-30 11:39                     ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-30 11:44                     ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 18:58       ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-04-26 18:58         ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-04-26 19:02         ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 19:02           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 19:00       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-26 19:00         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-26 19:15         ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 19:15           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-26 20:12           ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-26 20:12             ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-27  7:45             ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  7:47               ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  7:47                 ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  7:57               ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  7:57                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  8:02                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  8:02                   ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  9:00                   ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  9:00                     ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27 13:36                     ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27 13:36                       ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  8:36                 ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  8:36                   ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-28 11:28             ` Wu Fengguang
2006-04-28 11:28               ` Wu Fengguang
2006-04-28 11:28                 ` Wu Fengguang
2006-04-27  5:49         ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  5:49           ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27 15:12           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27 15:12             ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-28  4:54             ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-28  4:54               ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-28  5:34               ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-28  5:34                 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-04-27  9:35         ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  5:22       ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-27  5:22         ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 18:57     ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  2:19       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-04-27  2:19         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-04-27  8:03         ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27  8:03           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27 11:16           ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27 11:16             ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27 11:41             ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-04-27 11:41               ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2006-04-27 11:45               ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-27 11:45                 ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-28  9:10 ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-28  9:10   ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-28  9:21   ` Jens Axboe
2006-04-28  9:21     ` Jens Axboe
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-04-28 16:58 Al Boldi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060426194623.GD9211@suse.de \
    --to=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.