From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] random: convert to using iters, for Al Viro
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 17:55:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yoe52RaMayvgodVW@zx2c4.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a6ed6b9-0917-0d83-5c45-70ff58fad429@kernel.dk>
Hi Jens,
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 09:44:25AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Ran 32, 1k, 4k here and it does seem to be down aboout 3%. Which is
> definitely bigger than I expected, particularly for larger reads. If
> anything, the 32b read seems comparably better than eg 1k or 4k, which
> is also unexpected. Let me do a bit of profiling to see what is up.
Something to keep in mind wrt 32b is that for complicated crypto
reasons, the function has this logic:
- If len <= 32, generate one 64 byte block and give <= 32 bytes of it to
the caller.
- If len > 32, generate one 64 byte block, but give 0 of it to the
caller. Then generate ⌈len/64⌉ blocks for the caller.
Put together, this means:
- 1..32, 1 block
- 33..64, 2 blocks
- 65..128, 3 blocks
- 129..196, 4 blocks
So you get this sort of shelf where the amortization benefits don't
really kick in until after 3 blocks.
> If you're worried about it, I'd just keep the read/write and add the
> iter variants on the side.
Not a chance of that. These functions are already finicky as-is; I would
really hate to have to duplicate all of these paths.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-20 15:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-20 9:44 [PATCH v4 0/3] random: convert to using iters, for Al Viro Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] random: convert to using fops->read_iter() Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 13:37 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 14:36 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 14:39 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 15:12 ` Al Viro
2022-05-20 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] random: convert to using fops->write_iter() Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] random: wire up fops->splice_{read,write}_iter() Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 12:16 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] random: convert to using iters, for Al Viro Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:25 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 15:34 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:39 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 15:44 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:55 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2022-05-20 15:58 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 16:03 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 16:06 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:46 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 15:51 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:58 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 16:00 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 15:47 ` Al Viro
2022-05-20 15:53 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 16:15 ` Al Viro
2022-05-20 16:24 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-20 16:39 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-05-20 16:41 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-24 4:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=Yoe52RaMayvgodVW@zx2c4.com \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--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