From: Anuj Gupta/Anuj Gupta <anuj20.g@samsung.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, io-uring <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"Kanchan Joshi" <joshi.k@samsung.com>,
"Nitesh Shetty" <nj.shetty@samsung.com>,
"lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] dmabuf backed read/write
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 11:37:20 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <beb2ebf6-8207-4bbe-a77c-ccb09e2d841e@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aYI5S1puAZ-rPvlC@kbusch-mbp>
On 2/3/2026 11:37 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
> Thanks for submitting the topic. The performance wins look great, but
> I'm a little surpised passthrough didn't show any difference. We're
> still skipping a bit of transformations with the dmabuf compared to not
> having it, so maybe it's just a matter of crafting the right benchmark
> to show the benefit.
>
Those numbers were from a drive that saturates at ~5M IOPS,
sopassthrough didn’t have much headroom. I did a quick run with two such
drives and saw a small improvement (~2–3%): ~5.97 MIOPS -> ~6.13 MIOPS,
but I’ll try tweaking the kernel config a bit to see if there’s more
headroom.
+1 on the topic - I'm interested in attending the discussion and
reviewing/testing v3 when it lands.
Thanks,
Anuj
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-04 6:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20260204153051epcas5p1c2efd01ef32883680fed2541f9fca6c2@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2026-02-03 14:29 ` [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] dmabuf backed read/write Pavel Begunkov
2026-02-03 18:07 ` Keith Busch
2026-02-04 6:07 ` Anuj Gupta/Anuj Gupta [this message]
2026-02-04 11:38 ` Pavel Begunkov
2026-02-04 15:26 ` Nitesh Shetty
2026-02-05 3:12 ` Ming Lei
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=beb2ebf6-8207-4bbe-a77c-ccb09e2d841e@samsung.com \
--to=anuj20.g@samsung.com \
--cc=asml.silence@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=joshi.k@samsung.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=nj.shetty@samsung.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox