All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
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 14:33:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180622123307.GA16699@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180622121722.GW30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 848 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:17:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > 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()

What I have for now is slightly different:

	if ((events & POLL_BUSY_LOOP) && file->f_op->poll_busy_loop)
		file->f_op->poll_busy_loop(file, events);

	if (file->f_op->poll) {
		return file->f_op->poll(file, pt);
	} else if (file_has_poll_mask(file)) {
		...
	}

returns whatever we want part is something I want to look into
once the basics are done as it probably is non entirely trivial due to
structure of polling in the low-level network protocol.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	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 14:33:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180622123307.GA16699@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180622121722.GW30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:17:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > 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()

What I have for now is slightly different:

	if ((events & POLL_BUSY_LOOP) && file->f_op->poll_busy_loop)
		file->f_op->poll_busy_loop(file, events);

	if (file->f_op->poll) {
		return file->f_op->poll(file, pt);
	} else if (file_has_poll_mask(file)) {
		...
	}

returns whatever we want part is something I want to look into
once the basics are done as it probably is non entirely trivial due to
structure of polling in the low-level network protocol.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-22 12:33 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
2018-06-22 12:17                 ` Al Viro
2018-06-22 12:33                 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20180622123307.GA16699@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --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.