From: Olivier Langlois <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
Hao Xu <[email protected]>,
io-uring <[email protected]>,
linux-kernel <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] io_uring: Add support for napi_busy_poll
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 13:37:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Sat, 2022-02-19 at 17:22 -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>
> Outside of this, I was hoping to see some performance numbers in the
> main patch. Sounds like you have them, can you share?
>
Yes.
It is not much. Only numbers from my application and it is far from
being the best benchmark because the result can be influenced by
multiple external factors.
Beside addressing the race condition remaining inside io_cqring_wait()
around napi_list for v2 patch, creating a benchmark program that
isolate the performance of the new feature is on my todo list.
I would think that creating a simple UDP ping-pong setup and measure
RTT with and without busy_polling should be a good enough test.
In the meantime, here are the results that I have:
Without io_uring busy poll:
reaction time to an update: 17159usec
reaction time to an update: 19068usec
reaction time to an update: 23055usec
reaction time to an update: 16511usec
reaction time to an update: 17604usec
With io_uring busy poll:
reaction time to an update: 15782usec
reaction time to an update: 15337usec
reaction time to an update: 15379usec
reaction time to an update: 15275usec
reaction time to an update: 15107usec
Concerning my latency issue with busy polling, I have found this that
might help me:
https://lwn.net/ml/netdev/[email protected]/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-20 18:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-19 8:03 [PATCH v1] io_uring: Add support for napi_busy_poll Olivier Langlois
2022-02-19 21:42 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-02-20 0:22 ` Jens Axboe
2022-02-20 18:37 ` Olivier Langlois [this message]
2022-02-20 19:38 ` Jens Axboe
2022-02-21 19:29 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-02-21 5:25 ` Hao Xu
2022-02-20 20:51 ` kernel test robot
2022-02-20 21:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-02-20 21:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-02-21 5:23 ` Hao Xu
2022-02-25 5:32 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-02-25 15:32 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-02-28 18:34 ` Hao Xu
2022-02-28 21:20 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-03-01 3:53 ` Hao Xu
2022-02-28 18:26 ` Hao Xu
2022-02-28 21:01 ` Olivier Langlois
2022-03-01 8:23 ` Hao Xu
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=b674472d8c52a84002908e2248fd81ce11247569.camel@trillion01.com \
[email protected] \
[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