Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 6 Sep 2020 22:09:29 +0200
From:   "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
Cc:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] /dev/zero: also implement ->read
Message-ID: <20200906200929.GA554621@kroah.com>
References: <20200903155922.1111551-1-hch@lst.de>
 <55d1ecb8-4a0c-fa58-d3cf-bf6796eea7bd@csgroup.eu>
 <3b0b58be4b844162b73db1b108a9b995@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <20200906182122.GA12295@amd>
 <8c353864-76a9-90bf-fa2f-f7a8231b5487@csgroup.eu>
 <20200906183820.GA13290@amd>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20200906183820.GA13290@amd>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 08:38:20PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sun 2020-09-06 20:35:38, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Le 06/09/2020 ? 20:21, Pavel Machek a ?crit?:
> > >Hi!
> > >
> > >>>>Christophe reported a major speedup due to avoiding the iov_iter
> > >>>>overhead, so just add this trivial function.  Note that /dev/zero
> > >>>>already implements both an iter and non-iter writes so this just
> > >>>>makes it more symmetric.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> > >>>>Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> > >>>
> > >>>Tested-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
> > >>
> > >>Any idea what has happened to make the 'iter' version so bad?
> > >
> > >Exactly. Also it would be nice to note how the speedup was measured
> > >and what the speedup is.
> > >
> > 
> > Was measured on an 8xx powerpc running at 132MHz with:
> > 
> > 	dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/null count=1M
> > 
> > With the patch, dd displays a throughput of 113.5MB/s
> > Without the patch it is 99.9MB/s
> 
> Actually... that does not seem like a huge deal. read(/dev/zero) is
> not that common operation.

There is nothing wrong with this patch (aside from the sparse warning),
and it's in my tree now, so I don't understand complaining about it...

greg k-h