Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] fixed worker

[Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>]

On 5/31/22 2:55 AM, Hao Xu wrote:
> On 5/31/22 16:46, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 5/31/22 1:05 AM, Hao Xu wrote:
>>> On 5/15/22 21:12, Hao Xu wrote:
>>>> From: Hao Xu <howeyxu@tencent.com>
>>>>
>>>> This is the second version of fixed worker implementation.
>>>> Wrote a nop test program to test it, 3 fixed-workers VS 3 normal workers.
>>>> normal workers:
>>>> ./run_nop_wqe.sh nop_wqe_normal 200000 100 3 1-3
>>>>           time spent: 10464397 usecs      IOPS: 1911242
>>>>           time spent: 9610976 usecs       IOPS: 2080954
>>>>           time spent: 9807361 usecs       IOPS: 2039284
>>>>
>>>> fixed workers:
>>>> ./run_nop_wqe.sh nop_wqe_fixed 200000 100 3 1-3
>>>>           time spent: 17314274 usecs      IOPS: 1155116
>>>>           time spent: 17016942 usecs      IOPS: 1175299
>>>>           time spent: 17908684 usecs      IOPS: 1116776
>>>>
>>>> About 2x improvement. From perf result, almost no acct->lock contension.
>>>> Test program: https://github.com/HowHsu/liburing/tree/fixed_worker
>>>> liburing/test/nop_wqe.c
>>>>
>>>> v3->v4:
>>>>    - make work in fixed worker's private worfixed worker
>>>>    - tweak the io_wqe_acct struct to make it clearer
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jens and Pavel,
>>> Any comments on this series? There are two coding style issue and I'm
>>> going to send v5, before this I'd like to get some comment if there is
>>> any.
>>
>> I'll try to find some time to review it, doing a conference this week.
> 
> No worries.
> 
>> Rebasing on the current for-5.20/io_uring branch would be a good idea
>> anyway.
> 
> I'll do that.

When you do, most/all patches also have:

From: Hao Xu <haoxu.linux@gmail.com>

From: Hao Xu <howeyxu@tencent.com>

which is a bit confusing, so probably choose one and go with that :-)

-- 
Jens Axboe