From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@free.fr>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: acl_permission_check: disgusting performance
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 13:30:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110513183012.GA31958@mail.hallyn.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin-9SmqB=U7gmOFY2qkCLNd_Yn-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Quoting Linus Torvalds (torvalds@linux-foundation.org):
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Looks ok to me. And generates good code for acl_permission_check
> > without CONFIG_USER_NS.
> >
> > I'll see how much that function drops on the kernel profiles..
>
> Yup, looking good.
>
> For my "kernel make with no changes" workload, it dropped from
>
> 1.28% make [kernel.kallsyms] [k] acl_permission_check
>
> to
>
> 0.88% make [kernel.kallsyms] [k]
> acl_permission_check
>
> which is pretty much exactly the expected 30% drop from no longer
> having that expensive load of user_ns.
>
> Of course, that 30% improvement is just a 0.4% performance improvement
> in the big picture, but hey, almost half a percentage point on a real
> load from just one single function in the kernel is definitely worth
> doing.
That's great, thanks for the help.
> Do you want to carry this for 2.6.40, or should I just apply it?
It makes no user-visible difference so I'd say just apply it.
thanks,
-serge
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-13 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-13 0:29 acl_permission_check: disgusting performance Linus Torvalds
2011-05-13 2:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-05-13 3:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-13 4:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-13 4:02 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-05-13 4:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-13 13:19 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-05-13 16:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-13 16:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-05-13 18:30 ` Serge E. Hallyn [this message]
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=20110513183012.GA31958@mail.hallyn.com \
--to=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@free.fr \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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