From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [patch 0/4] Initial vfs scalability patches again
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 16:43:07 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100604064307.737085373@suse.de> (raw)
OK, I realised what I was smoking last time. So I put down the pipe and
went to score some stronger crack. And then:
- reduced ifdefs as much as feasible
- add more comments, avoided churn
- vastly improved lock library code, works with lockdep
- added helpers for file list iterations
- lglock type for what was previously open coded in file list locking
It looks in much better shape now I hope. Al would you consider them?
With all patches applied, I ran some single threaded microbenchmarks, and it
was difficult to tell much difference from the noise. I don't claim that there
is no slowdown because there is more instructions and memory accesses for SMP.
But it doesn't seem too bad.
Opteron, ran each test 30 times. Each run lasts for 3 seconds performing as
many operations as possible. Between each 10 runs, a rebooted. After all that
you still get artifacts, oh well.
Difference at 95.0% confidence (times, positive means patch is slower)
dup/close No difference proven at 95.0% confidence
open/close -2.48989% +/- 0.538414%
creat/unlink 3.14688% +/- 0.32411%
next reply other threads:[~2010-06-04 6:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-04 6:43 Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 1/4] fs: cleanup files_lock Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 14:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 14:39 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-04 15:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 18:39 ` [PATCH, RFC] tty: stop abusing file->f_u.fu_list Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-04 19:35 ` Al Viro
2010-06-05 11:39 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-08 5:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 2/4] lglock: introduce special lglock and brlock spin locks Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 7:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-04 14:13 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 14:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-04 15:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-04 15:12 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 3/4] fs: scale files_lock Nick Piggin
2010-06-04 6:43 ` [patch 4/4] fs: brlock vfsmount_lock Nick Piggin
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=20100604064307.737085373@suse.de \
--to=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).