From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix crash when using XFS on loopback
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 09:13:31 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140109001331.GA15738@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140108135930.9fc1d3a63eeb9a45dcbbb2e8@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:59:30PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2014 23:37:49 +0200 Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > The patch looks good to me but it probably should go through Andrew's tree.
>
> yup.
>
> page_mapping() will be called quite frequently, and adding a new
> test-n-branch in there will be somewhat costly. We might end up with a
> better kernel if we were to instead revert 8456a648cf44f. How useful
> was that patch?
Hello,
Performance effect of this patch was decribed in the cover-letter, but
I missed to attach it to patch description. Sorry about that.
In summary, this patch saves some memory and decreases cache-footprint
so that it increases performance.
Here goes the description in cover-letter.
Below is some numbers of 'cat /proc/slabinfo'.
* Before *
# name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab> : tunables [snip...]
kmalloc-512 527 600 512 8 1 : tunables 54 27 0 : slabdata 75 75 0
kmalloc-256 210 210 256 15 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 14 14 0
kmalloc-192 1040 1040 192 20 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 52 52 0
kmalloc-96 750 750 128 30 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 25 25 0
kmalloc-64 2773 2773 64 59 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 47 47 0
kmalloc-128 660 690 128 30 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 23 23 0
kmalloc-32 11200 11200 32 112 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 100 100 0
kmem_cache 197 200 192 20 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 10 10 0
* After *
# name <active_objs> <num_objs> <objsize> <objperslab> <pagesperslab> : tunables [snip...]
kmalloc-512 525 640 512 8 1 : tunables 54 27 0 : slabdata 80 80 0
kmalloc-256 210 210 256 15 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 14 14 0
kmalloc-192 1016 1040 192 20 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 52 52 0
kmalloc-96 560 620 128 31 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 20 20 0
kmalloc-64 2148 2280 64 60 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 38 38 0
kmalloc-128 647 682 128 31 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 22 22 0
kmalloc-32 11360 11413 32 113 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 101 101 0
kmem_cache 197 200 192 20 1 : tunables 120 60 0 : slabdata 10 10 0
kmem_caches consisting of objects less than or equal to 128 byte have one more
objects in a slab. You can see it at objperslab.
Here are the performance results on my 4 cpus machine.
* Before *
Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 50 -l 1000' (10 runs):
238,309,671 cache-misses ( +- 0.40% )
12.010172090 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.21% )
* After *
Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 50 -l 1000' (10 runs):
229,945,138 cache-misses ( +- 0.23% )
11.627897174 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.14% )
cache-misses are reduced by this patchset, roughly 5%.
And elapsed times are also improved by 3.1% to baseline.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-09 0:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-04 17:45 [PATCH] fix crash when using XFS on loopback Mikulas Patocka
2014-01-04 18:48 ` John David Anglin
2014-01-04 19:55 ` Mikulas Patocka
2014-01-04 20:31 ` John David Anglin
2014-01-04 20:52 ` Mikulas Patocka
2014-01-06 7:35 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-06 17:54 ` Mikulas Patocka
2014-01-07 1:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2014-01-08 21:05 ` Helge Deller
2014-01-08 21:37 ` Pekka Enberg
2014-01-08 21:42 ` Helge Deller
2014-01-08 21:59 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-09 0:13 ` Joonsoo Kim [this message]
2014-01-09 0:19 ` Andrew Morton
2014-01-09 8:35 ` Pekka Enberg
2014-01-09 8:49 ` Simon Baatz
2014-01-09 8:49 ` Simon Baatz
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=20140109001331.GA15738@lge.com \
--to=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
/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.