Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756089AbaGCH6F (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 03:58:05 -0400 Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.141]:39283 "EHLO ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752907AbaGCH6E (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2014 03:58:04 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArhaAL0LtVN5LHZ8PGdsb2JhbABagw2DSoUIpBYBAgEBB5pVAYEIFwQBAQEBODWEAwEBBTocDxQQCAMYCSUPBSUDBxoTiEHHbxcYhViGDQGDJAeEQwWabJYMgVQr Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:56:44 +1000 From: Dave Chinner To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Davidlohr Bueso , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tim Chen , Ingo Molnar , jason.low2@hp.com Subject: Re: [regression, 3.16-rc] rwsem: optimistic spinning causing performance degradation Message-ID: <20140703075644.GR4453@dastard> References: <20140703023204.GN4453@dastard> <1404358268.23839.13.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> <20140703045933.GP4453@dastard> <20140703053911.GQ4453@dastard> <20140703073852.GV19379@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140703073852.GV19379@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 09:38:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 03:39:11PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > There's another regression with the optimisitic spinning in rwsems > > as well: it increases the size of the struct rw_semaphore by 16 > > bytes. That has increased the size of the struct xfs_inode by 32 > > bytes. > > > > That's pretty damn significant - it's no uncommon to see machines > > with tens of millions of cached XFS inodes, so increasing the size > > of the inode by 4% is actually very significant. That's enough to go > > from having a well balanced workload to not being able to fit the > > working set of inodes in memory. > > > > Filesystem developers will do almost anything to remove a few bytes > > from the struct inode because inode cache footprint is extremely > > important for performance. We also tend to get upset and > > unreasonable when other people undo that hard work by making changes > > that bloat the generic structures embedded in the inode > > structures.... > > Jason Low actually did a patch, yesterday, to shrink rwsem back to its > old size (on 64bit). That's good to know. Thanks, Peter. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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/