From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] task_put batching
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 10:11:21 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 7/20/20 10:06 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> On 20/07/2020 18:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 7/20/20 9:22 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> On 18/07/2020 17:37, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/20 2:32 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>>>> For my a bit exaggerated test case perf continues to show high CPU
>>>>> cosumption by io_dismantle(), and so calling it io_iopoll_complete().
>>>>> Even though the patch doesn't yield throughput increase for my setup,
>>>>> probably because the effect is hidden behind polling, but it definitely
>>>>> improves relative percentage. And the difference should only grow with
>>>>> increasing number of CPUs. Another reason to have this is that atomics
>>>>> may affect other parallel tasks (e.g. which doesn't use io_uring)
>>>>>
>>>>> before:
>>>>> io_iopoll_complete: 5.29%
>>>>> io_dismantle_req: 2.16%
>>>>>
>>>>> after:
>>>>> io_iopoll_complete: 3.39%
>>>>> io_dismantle_req: 0.465%
>>>>
>>>> Still not seeing a win here, but it's clean and it _should_ work. For
>>>> some reason I end up getting the offset in task ref put growing the
>>>> fput_many(). Which doesn't (on the surface) make a lot of sense, but
>>>> may just mean that we have some weird side effects.
>>>
>>> It grows because the patch is garbage, the second condition is always false.
>>> See the diff. Could you please drop both patches?
>>
>> Hah, indeed. With this on top, it looks like it should in terms of
>> performance and profiles.
>
> It just shows, that it doesn't really matters for a single-threaded app,
> as expected. Worth to throw some contention though. I'll think about
> finding some time to get/borrow a multi-threaded one.
But it kind of did here, ended up being mostly a wash in terms of perf
here as my testing reported. With the incremental applied, it's up a bit
over before the task put batching.
>> I can just fold this into the existing one, if you'd like.
>
> Would be nice. I'm going to double-check the counter and re-measure anyway.
> BTW, how did you find it? A tool or a proc file would be awesome.
For this kind of testing, I just use t/io_uring out of fio. It's probably
the lowest overhead kind of tool:
# sudo taskset -c 0 t/io_uring -b512 -p1 /dev/nvme2n1
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-20 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-18 8:32 [PATCH 0/2] task_put batching Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-18 8:32 ` [PATCH 1/2] tasks: add put_task_struct_many() Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-18 8:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: batch put_task_struct() Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-18 14:37 ` [PATCH 0/2] task_put batching Jens Axboe
2020-07-19 11:15 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-19 18:49 ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-20 14:18 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-20 15:22 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-20 15:49 ` Jens Axboe
2020-07-20 16:06 ` Pavel Begunkov
2020-07-20 16:11 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-07-20 16:42 ` Pavel Begunkov
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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