lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [patch]block: fix ioc locking warning
From
2012/2/7 Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 09:27:06AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> It's one wq scheduling on exit for any task which has issued an IO.  I
>> don't think it would matter except for task fork/exit microbenchs (or
>> workloads which approximate to that).  I'll get some measurements and
>> strip the optimization if it doesn't really show up.
>
> I'm still playing with test methods and getting numbers but the
> following is the simplified one of the three setups I'm playing with -
> the current one, simplified and no optimization.  There *seems* to be
> appreciable performance degradation on fork/exit w/ ioc microbenchs so
> I'm likely to go with the following.  I'll post when I know more.
Hi,
Since you are talking about performance, one of our microbenchmark (swap)
shows a regression. Alex bisect it to be b2efa05265d62bc2, which is related to
the ioc change. A little strange to me, don't expect such change can cause
performance issue. I haven't double check the issue, but if you have
ideas, please
let me know.

Thanks,
Shaohua
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-07 01:33    [W:0.987 / U:0.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site