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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1A5C433EF for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 20:19:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166FA613D2 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 20:19:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235885AbhJDUVb (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:21:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48602 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235373AbhJDUVb (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Oct 2021 16:21:31 -0400 Received: from mail-il1-x129.google.com (mail-il1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::129]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1444EC061745 for ; Mon, 4 Oct 2021 13:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-il1-x129.google.com with SMTP id b6so19674344ilv.0 for ; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:19:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C7jkfRDukSEsqPCYMfCEY2tJQPqCo2I9D8v2NfMPRio=; b=zYBAwCMRIcVGBXoCdwOqitnshB30oqAYmtfy6qpRwO9LmBLDcI78OiZiuTq3G3uXeo y67bS8LDo/IBSTcLk1wme68sy2dqU5MtD0QJb/dk64CBRCA5ThoLRpNQdOQ25ogxHV1b u8CNoAf0uEEUqbg+Tt6M39zhF1WFXjAcKV2yUvWMA/QXwtFWnoROXCXI0EarfXibuBH1 ZMEzt6lEl8MoH3/i3Eg0tqwVb7w8B+UXZgxut+9kNnWFjh2h5H1z1vBAykc1BO9hSXdV +5D3Ie0IfnECYtCZ1VKoEiGTSS1K2BRr4XSkK84Xum3cIXsRRz5dpytYjVwMrsvNGOLW U8rw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=C7jkfRDukSEsqPCYMfCEY2tJQPqCo2I9D8v2NfMPRio=; b=WofPP0X/BYLWNqE5oMd1QclJruutWNHVQvExv3rcyVbIRHOqhbf/SuCZ8ckOFvLs1e 4LyfVuo14gbeZrFiaeILbXGwuYq/qp+Im9lnmOjU6J54l4YKhspEsUEozSFgM4r5q7vu 2LdXISwV/ATUl+Tg2VYX5xoXR2nfzK+mym2HWnDbtpn1LgFfPDM2KMBbRStP3u4v/un+ Jr/LTfXcX+0qmzAC/GCmQsneSK0FXAWd0RZePZOTeprZgmGwNf1rcKxXDSM/CkdF10L7 kNgh2fmbpjda3MkCbNlY0YO5+a10NOky/0dorR6jf10onhrtZdpVLrceyEXICopdbmbI gh1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530rtwMtgTV32BwDrmW5MzMYzJsPln4gNcnEn/fjd/9FxRkuOgpK UYI8kJN96CfnnuGhuiMfCPHHvZfN50g6h8UHwaU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZzBoomHra8hjIu1hACt1QorTkm+vUdBq1/s54KMvitXwFsQOZCDUHgUXSfa4UYJs8VHIJXQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1c0d:: with SMTP id l13mr45635ilh.7.1633378780523; Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.30] ([207.135.234.126]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c2sm2870548ilm.21.2021.10.04.13.19.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Oct 2021 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] squeeze more performance To: Pavel Begunkov , io-uring@vger.kernel.org References: From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <6c6d9fde-5073-792d-312e-a57ee2a09598@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 14:19:39 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On 10/4/21 1:02 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: > fio/t/io_uring -s32 -d32 -c32 -N1 > > | baseline | 0-15 | 0-16 | diff > setup 1: | 34 MIOPS | 42 MIOPS | 42.2 MIOPS | 25 % > setup 2: | 31 MIOPS | 31 MIOPS | 32 MIOPS | ~3 $ > > Setup 1 gets 25% performance improvement, which is unexpected and a > share of it should be accounted as compiler/HW magic. Setup 2 is just > 3%, but the catch is that some of the patches _very_ unexpectedly sink > performance, so it's more like 31 MIOPS -> 29 -> 30 -> 29 -> 31 -> 32 > > I'd suggest to leave 16/16 aside, maybe for future consideration and > refinement. The end result is not very clear, I'd expect probably > around 3-5% with a more stable setup for nops32, and a better win > for io_cqring_ev_posted() intensive cases like BPF. Looks and tests good for me. I've skipped 16/16 for now, we can evaluate that one later. -- Jens Axboe