From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 13:17:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180622121722.GW30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180622120739.GA15351@lst.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 781 bytes --]
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 02:07:39PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:56:13PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > So mark that in ->f_mode - I strongly suspect that
> > sk_can_busy_loop(sock->sk) can't change while an opened file is there.
> > And lift that (conditional on new FMODE_BUSY_LOOP) into do_poll()
> > and do_select() - we *already* have bits of pieces of that logics in
> > there and that way they'd at least be gathered in one place.
>
> The problem is that call to sk_busy_loop(), which is going to be indirect
> no matter what.
if ->f_poll_head is NULL {
use ->poll
} else {
if can ll_poll (checked in ->f_mode)
call ->ll_poll(), if it returns what we want - we are done
add to ->f_poll_head
call ->poll_mask()
}
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 13:17:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180622121722.GW30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180622120739.GA15351@lst.de>
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 02:07:39PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:56:13PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > So mark that in ->f_mode - I strongly suspect that
> > sk_can_busy_loop(sock->sk) can't change while an opened file is there.
> > And lift that (conditional on new FMODE_BUSY_LOOP) into do_poll()
> > and do_select() - we *already* have bits of pieces of that logics in
> > there and that way they'd at least be gathered in one place.
>
> The problem is that call to sk_busy_loop(), which is going to be indirect
> no matter what.
if ->f_poll_head is NULL {
use ->poll
} else {
if can ll_poll (checked in ->f_mode)
call ->ll_poll(), if it returns what we want - we are done
add to ->f_poll_head
call ->poll_mask()
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-22 12:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-22 8:27 [lkp-robot] [fs] 3deb642f0d: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -8.8% regression kernel test robot
2018-06-22 8:27 ` kernel test robot
2018-06-22 9:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 9:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 9:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 9:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 10:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 10:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 11:01 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 11:01 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 11:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 11:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 11:56 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 11:56 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 12:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 12:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 12:17 ` Al Viro [this message]
2018-06-22 12:17 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 12:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 12:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 12:29 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 12:29 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 19:06 ` Sean Paul
2018-06-22 19:06 ` Sean Paul
2018-06-22 10:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 10:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 10:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 10:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-22 15:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 15:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 15:14 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 15:14 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 15:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 15:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-22 20:02 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 20:02 ` Al Viro
2018-06-23 7:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-23 7:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-26 6:03 ` Ye Xiaolong
2018-06-26 6:03 ` Ye Xiaolong
2018-06-27 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-27 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 0:38 ` Ye Xiaolong
2018-06-28 0:38 ` Ye Xiaolong
2018-06-28 13:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-06-28 13:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20180622121722.GW30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.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.