Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935514Ab3IECEq (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 22:04:46 -0400 Received: from g1t0029.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.36]:46817 "EHLO g1t0029.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763193Ab3IECEp (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2013 22:04:45 -0400 Message-ID: <5227E6AF.2040603@hp.com> Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 22:04:31 -0400 From: Waiman Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130109 Thunderbird/10.0.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Stoffel CC: Alexander Viro , Linus Torvalds , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" , "Norton, Scott J" Subject: Re: [PATCH] dcache: Translating dentry into pathname without taking rename_lock References: <1378321523-40893-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <52278970.2080803@hp.com> <21031.39606.16374.72229@quad.stoffel.home> In-Reply-To: <21031.39606.16374.72229@quad.stoffel.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1484 Lines: 32 On 09/04/2013 04:40 PM, John Stoffel wrote: >>>>>> "Waiman" == Waiman Long writes: > Waiman> In term of AIM7 performance, this patch has a performance boost of > Waiman> about 6-7% on top of Linus' lockref patch on a 8-socket 80-core DL980. > > Waiman> User Range | 10-100 | 200-10000 | 1100-2000 | > Waiman> Mean JPM w/o patch | 4,365,114 | 7,211,115 | 6,964,439 | > Waiman> Mean JPM with patch | 3,872,850 | 7,655,958 | 7,422,598 | > Waiman> % Change | -11.3% | +6.2% | +6.6% | > > This -11% impact is worisome to me, because at smaller numbers of > users, I would still expect the performance to go up. So why the big > drop? > > Also, how is the impact of these changes on smaller 1 socket, 4 core > systems? Just because it helps a couple of big boxes, doesn't mean it > won't hurt the more common small case. > > John I don't believe the patch will make it slower with less user. It is more a result of run-to-run variation. The short workload typically completed in a very short time. In the 10-100 user range, the completion times range from 0.02-0.11s. With a higher user count, it needs several seconds to run and hence the results are more reliable. Longman -- 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/