On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 01:43:33PM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:47:08PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-11-08 at 18:01 +0000, Nikunj Kela (nkela) wrote: > > > But we can hypothesise and handwave about it until the cows come home; > > > I'd like to see a real test of whether it actually makes a difference > > > that we care about. > > > > > > If it does, one option might be to just build separate versions of > > > scan.c for each endianness, since that's the critical path we care > > > about. > > > > > > I wonder if this feature is really that important that we need to duplicate the drivers. > > > Also, it might take some time for me to find some device that I can run the tests with and without this patch. > > > > Hm? > > > > # modprobe mtdram size=16384 > > # mount -tjffs2 mtd0 /mnt > > # cp -av .git /mnt # until it fills up > > # umount /mnt > > # perf record mount -tjffs2 mtd0 /mnt > > > > On my desktop 'perf' only gets about 12 samples from that, so it's not > > ideal. But you can make the mtdram device bigger, use something other > > than my shiny new laptop, and use a higher sample frequency from 'perf' > > and you should be able to get some vaguely meaningful results. > > > Made a little mistake. The first tests were with Nikunj's very first version which was just a pure Kconfig option. I reran the test of the second version and increased the mtdram space to 100megs. baseline below, sh-4.2# perf stat -B mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock7 /mnt jffs2: Flash size not aligned to erasesize, reducing to 99944KiB Performance counter stats for 'mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock7 /mnt': 100.303072 task-clock # 0.775 CPUs utilized 19 context-switches # 0.189 K/sec 0 cpu-migrations # 0.000 K/sec 94 page-faults # 0.937 K/sec 134135872 cycles # 1.337 GHz [92.88%] 29217497 stalled-cycles-frontend # 21.78% frontend cycles idle [92.02%] 10493221 stalled-cycles-backend # 7.82% backend cycles idle [92.05%] 136740541 instructions # 1.02 insns per cycle # 0.21 stalled cycles per insn [92.04%] 14639149 branches # 145.949 M/sec [19.06%] 1384856 branch-misses # 9.46% of all branches [16.29%] 0.129377322 seconds time elapsed This is with the mount option changes added. sh-4.2# perf stat -B mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock7 /mnt jffs2: Flash size not aligned to erasesize, reducing to 99944KiB Performance counter stats for 'mount -t jffs2 /dev/mtdblock7 /mnt': 100.516160 task-clock # 0.315 CPUs utilized 14 context-switches # 0.139 K/sec 0 cpu-migrations # 0.000 K/sec 94 page-faults # 0.935 K/sec 129255757 cycles # 1.286 GHz [19.32%] 26930446 stalled-cycles-frontend # 20.84% frontend cycles idle [92.00%] 10068627 stalled-cycles-backend # 7.79% backend cycles idle [92.05%] 138000320 instructions # 1.07 insns per cycle # 0.20 stalled cycles per insn [92.04%] 26158985 branches # 260.247 M/sec [90.09%] 1242606 branch-misses # 4.75% of all branches [19.24%] 0.319593555 seconds time elapsed It looks like the took slightly more than twice as long to mount. Daniel ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/