From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
jason.low2@hp.com
Subject: Re: [regression, 3.16-rc] rwsem: optimistic spinning causing performance degradation
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:56:44 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140703075644.GR4453@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140703073852.GV19379@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:38:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 03:39:11PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > There's another regression with the optimisitic spinning in rwsems
> > as well: it increases the size of the struct rw_semaphore by 16
> > bytes. That has increased the size of the struct xfs_inode by 32
> > bytes.
> >
> > That's pretty damn significant - it's no uncommon to see machines
> > with tens of millions of cached XFS inodes, so increasing the size
> > of the inode by 4% is actually very significant. That's enough to go
> > from having a well balanced workload to not being able to fit the
> > working set of inodes in memory.
> >
> > Filesystem developers will do almost anything to remove a few bytes
> > from the struct inode because inode cache footprint is extremely
> > important for performance. We also tend to get upset and
> > unreasonable when other people undo that hard work by making changes
> > that bloat the generic structures embedded in the inode
> > structures....
>
> Jason Low actually did a patch, yesterday, to shrink rwsem back to its
> old size (on 64bit).
That's good to know. Thanks, Peter.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-03 7:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-03 2:32 [regression, 3.16-rc] rwsem: optimistic spinning causing performance degradation Dave Chinner
2014-07-03 3:31 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-07-03 4:59 ` Dave Chinner
2014-07-03 5:39 ` Dave Chinner
2014-07-03 7:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-03 7:56 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
[not found] <1404413420.8764.42.camel@j-VirtualBox>
[not found] ` <1404416236.3179.18.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
2014-07-03 20:08 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-07-04 1:01 ` Dave Chinner
2014-07-04 1:46 ` Jason Low
2014-07-04 1:54 ` Jason Low
2014-07-04 6:13 ` Dave Chinner
2014-07-04 7:06 ` Jason Low
2014-07-04 8:21 ` Dave Chinner
2014-07-04 8:53 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-07-05 3:14 ` Jason Low
2014-07-04 7:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-04 8:40 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-07-05 3:49 ` Jason Low
[not found] ` <CAAW_DMjgd5+EOvZX7_iZe-jHp=00Nf7MX3z6hBCRPgOfqnMtEA@mail.gmail.com>
2014-07-14 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-14 17:10 ` Jason Low
2014-07-15 2:17 ` Dave Chinner
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=20140703075644.GR4453@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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