From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6B59C3A5A2 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:19:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79A9A20872 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:19:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="utNmMpJ4" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389294AbfIJJTS (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 05:19:18 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f51.google.com ([209.85.166.51]:33939 "EHLO mail-io1-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728837AbfIJJTR (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 05:19:17 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f51.google.com with SMTP id k13so20639832ioj.1 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 02:19:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FLSH+s3I1EjuRyWzmaf5krWguVxQOdOr9FFToFUKS0U=; b=utNmMpJ4VB7VGYKfV7uyZvjahve502gtTAQ514WsAbhOKf5NjYPC8yTlxwEnLX5mjU SEAryeZ1hKG0HYOmv/abGeZrq10blJJQsA1TyJ6BkM8vSkpaHewFfarbpuTXJuS/0Rgk YvS7lUFSCXpaKQoQUftjd8brABaHcghfmiBmUxaMEbMBnqggTWlGnqkhk7knlcFwkvy8 T/zjmnRoLiTcoWAh9Yi81JStyd3RSeOv5UpSyt/uKl+vcd75b14CyHqUIRsN16Nlz7j/ VCnVahLNnSGQExpGLiR0CbnjpBxmHN1OC/xDce0c+42rHKEts17jLNuDv2P0uncIbUfj UuxQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FLSH+s3I1EjuRyWzmaf5krWguVxQOdOr9FFToFUKS0U=; b=WyFY34JvA/LA2qgWKdhOGXd9oCBa4O/e88kGeMsiuTbllH5SOihEbpzM+DGtA/XaWg NHNrAuI+it9PAjTEN+NRY4zo9p61yPxRlCEh69vEd4LMzWp64Y8CtjSqZ31VdA6Y9PdK IRd863D0S7fYVx9oXoQ6wjGPi38URzVW6wdM2rwYxTUz+LG731VNvUQkx1CQnJVWBwtf mQ8qb3YpzedRTBZaQiO3T6RyGGT9c8+Hhrdtrf++I4d+UIiLd1Y73lBybY5iLAw2N790 66QvNEdAyREQv+MYijAK34bcbaHDlZbcDT0bE/5M7I72klTMRVc7Q+wx1L9UJpV/72gf zIEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVZBaM7A/40hLey9W4GlYD/i9IYLuk5W0zVi8QXouIDT2IegP25 95slO27RcEqlx6aPkVFoGuW+YXAEX0DjMB7ZRtg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz5vq/WSdEy20ox0jWzi5PdZC4USpVsflzfhX7kFAxlii23mTG5DOqYe4BmhWiVT+BIU6K7cqeXPfXlVdlzWZ4= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:4404:: with SMTP id r4mr22556736ioa.159.1568107156750; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 02:19:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: ronnie sahlberg Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 19:19:05 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [SMB3][PATCHes] parallelizing decryption of large read responses To: Steve French Cc: CIFS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-cifs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg We have now a decently large number of new mount options so we need a patch to the manpage. That said, we should also make sure that we try to set reasonable values by default, or even longer term, remove the options with heuristics. (Very very few people read the manpage or ever use any of these mount options so our default should be "as close to optimal as possible" and using a mount option should be the rare exception where our heuristics just went wrong.) On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:21 AM Steve French wrote: > > Had a minor typo in patch 2 - fixed in attached > > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:31 PM Steve French wrote: > > > > I am seeing very good performance benefit from offload of decryption > > of encrypted SMB3 read responses to a pool of worker threads > > (optionally). See attached patches. > > > > I plan to add another patch to only offload when number of requests in > > flight is > 1 (since there is no point offloading and doing a thread > > switch if no other responses would overlap in the cifsd thread reading > > from the socket). > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > > > Steve > > > > -- > Thanks, > > Steve