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;
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To:     'Christophe Leroy' <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
CC:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, "arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] /dev/zero: also implement ->read
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] /dev/zero: also implement ->read
Thread-Index: AQHWggy41s1fAL/OckmYjTgFjgCjKqlXb8rwgASFNZ2AACUDkA==
Date:   Sun, 6 Sep 2020 20:52:31 +0000
Message-ID: <f2e9c57db2b548949e6bd570a6dc3c5d@AcuMS.aculab.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>
In-Reply-To: <8c353864-76a9-90bf-fa2f-f7a8231b5487@csgroup.eu>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

From: Christophe Leroy
> Sent: 06 September 2020 19:36
> Hi,
> 
> Le 06/09/2020 à 20:21, Pavel Machek a écrit :
> > 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

That in itself isn't a problem.
What was the throughput before any of these patches?

I just remember another thread about the same test running
a lot slower after one of the related changes.
While this speeds up read /dev/zero (which is uncommon)
if this is needed to get near the old performance then
the changes to the 'iter' code will affect real workloads.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)