Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: add support for LOOKUP_NONBLOCK

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 8:08 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> OK, ran some numbers. The test app benchmarks opening X files, I just
> used /usr on my test box. That's 182677 files. To mimic real worldy
> kind of setups, 33% of the files can be looked up hot, so LOOKUP_NONBLOCK
> will succeed.

Perhaps more interestingly, what's the difference between the patchset
as posted for just io_uring?

IOW, does the synchronous LOOKUP_NONBLOCK actually help?

I'm obviously a big believer in the whole "avoid thread setup costs if
not necessary", so I'd _expect_ it to help, but maybe the possible
extra parallelism is enough to overcome the thread setup and
synchronization costs even for a fast cached RCU lookup.

(I also suspect the reality is often much closer to 100% cached
lookups than just 33%, but who knows - there are things like just
concurrent renames that can cause the RCU lookup to fail even if it
_was_ cached, so it's not purely about whether things are in the
dcache or not).

              Linus



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux