From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [MMTests] IO metadata on XFS
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 02:32:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120702063226.GA32151@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120701235458.GM19223@dastard>
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:54:58AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> That will be caused by the fact we changed all the metadata updates
> to be logged, which means a transaction every time .dirty_inode is
> called.
>
> This should mostly go away when XFS is converted to use .update_time
> rather than .dirty_inode to only issue transactions when the VFS
> updates the atime rather than every .dirty_inode call...
I think the patch to do that conversion still needs review..
> It increases the CPU overhead (dirty_inode can be called up to 4
> times per write(2) call, IIRC), so with limited numbers of
> threads/limited CPU power it will result in lower performance. Where
> you have lots of CPU power, there will be little difference in
> performance...
When I checked it it could only be called twice, and we'd already
optimize away the second call. I'd defintively like to track down where
the performance changes happend, at least to a major version but even
better to a -rc or git commit.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [MMTests] IO metadata on XFS
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 02:32:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120702063226.GA32151@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120701235458.GM19223@dastard>
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:54:58AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> That will be caused by the fact we changed all the metadata updates
> to be logged, which means a transaction every time .dirty_inode is
> called.
>
> This should mostly go away when XFS is converted to use .update_time
> rather than .dirty_inode to only issue transactions when the VFS
> updates the atime rather than every .dirty_inode call...
I think the patch to do that conversion still needs review..
> It increases the CPU overhead (dirty_inode can be called up to 4
> times per write(2) call, IIRC), so with limited numbers of
> threads/limited CPU power it will result in lower performance. Where
> you have lots of CPU power, there will be little difference in
> performance...
When I checked it it could only be called twice, and we'd already
optimize away the second call. I'd defintively like to track down where
the performance changes happend, at least to a major version but even
better to a -rc or git commit.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [MMTests] IO metadata on XFS
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 02:32:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120702063226.GA32151@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120701235458.GM19223@dastard>
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:54:58AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> That will be caused by the fact we changed all the metadata updates
> to be logged, which means a transaction every time .dirty_inode is
> called.
>
> This should mostly go away when XFS is converted to use .update_time
> rather than .dirty_inode to only issue transactions when the VFS
> updates the atime rather than every .dirty_inode call...
I think the patch to do that conversion still needs review..
> It increases the CPU overhead (dirty_inode can be called up to 4
> times per write(2) call, IIRC), so with limited numbers of
> threads/limited CPU power it will result in lower performance. Where
> you have lots of CPU power, there will be little difference in
> performance...
When I checked it it could only be called twice, and we'd already
optimize away the second call. I'd defintively like to track down where
the performance changes happend, at least to a major version but even
better to a -rc or git commit.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-02 6:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 108+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-20 11:32 MMTests 0.04 Mel Gorman
2012-06-20 11:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:21 ` [MMTests] Page allocator Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:21 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:22 ` [MMTests] Network performance Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:22 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:23 ` [MMTests] IO metadata on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:23 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:24 ` [MMTests] IO metadata on ext4 Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:24 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:25 ` [MMTests] IO metadata on XFS Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:25 ` Mel Gorman
2012-06-29 11:25 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-01 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-01 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-01 23:54 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-02 6:32 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2012-07-02 6:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-07-02 6:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2012-07-02 14:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 14:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 14:32 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 19:35 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 19:35 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 19:35 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-03 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-03 0:19 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-03 10:59 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 10:59 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 10:59 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 11:44 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 11:44 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 11:44 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 12:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-03 12:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-03 12:31 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-03 13:08 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:08 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:08 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:28 ` Eugeni Dodonov
2012-07-03 13:28 ` Eugeni Dodonov
2012-07-04 0:47 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-04 0:47 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-04 0:47 ` Dave Chinner
2012-07-04 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 13:04 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-03 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-03 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-03 14:04 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-07-02 13:30 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 13:30 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-02 13:30 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:52 ` [MMTests] Page reclaim performance on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:52 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:53 ` [MMTests] Page reclaim performance on ext4 Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:53 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:53 ` [MMTests] Page reclaim performance on xfs Mel Gorman
2012-07-04 15:53 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-05 14:56 ` [MMTests] Interactivity during IO on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-05 14:56 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-10 9:49 ` Jan Kara
2012-07-10 9:49 ` Jan Kara
2012-07-10 11:30 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-10 11:30 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-05 14:57 ` [MMTests] Interactivity during IO on ext4 Mel Gorman
2012-07-05 14:57 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:12 ` [MMTests] Scheduler Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:12 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:13 ` [MMTests] Sysbench read-only on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:13 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-24 2:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-07-24 2:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-07-24 8:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-24 8:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-24 8:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-07-24 8:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-07-23 21:14 ` [MMTests] Sysbench read-only on ext4 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:14 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:15 ` [MMTests] Sysbench read-only on xfs Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:15 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:17 ` [MMTests] memcachetest and parallel IO on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:17 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:19 ` [MMTests] memcachetest and parallel IO on xfs Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:19 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:20 ` [MMTests] Stress high-order allocations on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:20 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:21 ` [MMTests] dbench4 async " Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:21 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-16 14:52 ` Jan Kara
2012-08-16 14:52 ` Jan Kara
2012-08-21 22:00 ` Jan Kara
2012-08-21 22:00 ` Jan Kara
2012-08-22 10:48 ` Mel Gorman
2012-08-22 10:48 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:23 ` [MMTests] dbench4 async on ext4 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:23 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:24 ` [MMTests] Threaded IO Performance on ext3 Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:24 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:25 ` [MMTests] Threaded IO Performance on xfs Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:25 ` Mel Gorman
2012-07-23 21:25 ` Mel Gorman
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=20120702063226.GA32151@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.