From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [fs] 5c6de586e8: vm-scalability.throughput +12.4% improvement (from reorganizing struct inode?)
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:34:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180704233415.GA30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFy-tgKkq_oiQaZge3URgZL0ruvoJ6pUCf=H+aschPdqAw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1059 bytes --]
On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 11:59:30AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 11:27 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This may be a test fluctuation or as a result of moving
> > i_blkbits closer to i_bytes and i_lock.
>
> Hey, I certainly am not against shrinking the inode (and in general,
> removing 'enum's from internal structures), although that benchmark
> improvement looks suspiciously large. The kernel test robot is lovely,
> but some of the performance fluctuations may be more noise than
> others.
>
> I was hoping the patch would go through the regular vfs tree, though. Al?
Sure, but
* please, repost it. github's webshite is atrocious ;-/
* I would like more details about the variation of timing -
what's the dispersion from boot to boot, for starters?
I don't hate that patch, but there are immediate followup questions - e.g.
how sensitive is relative position of i_lock/i_hash/i_sb? Those are *not*
close to each other. E.g. what happens if one moves i_hash right after
i_ino?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-04 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAOQ4uxgRXzq+ZSmwRB_nyGijFJsiuWXaM_F74W-3JOyTvAEz-Q@mail.gmail.com>
2018-07-02 18:59 ` [lkp-robot] [fs] 5c6de586e8: vm-scalability.throughput +12.4% improvement (from reorganizing struct inode?) Linus Torvalds
2018-07-04 23:34 ` Al Viro [this message]
2018-07-05 1:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-07-05 5:50 ` Amir Goldstein
2018-07-05 6:01 ` Amir Goldstein
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=20180704233415.GA30522@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.