From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF56E6781D for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 15:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 5E8FB6B007B; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:45:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 598F26B0083; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:45:03 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 4878F6B0085; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:45:03 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 274536B007B for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:45:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA9C8AB53F for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 15:45:02 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82774236846.16.95A1078 Received: from mail-oa1-f51.google.com (mail-oa1-f51.google.com [209.85.160.51]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38E11A0008 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 15:44:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel-dk.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.s=20230601 header.b=FlQjZgym; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of axboe@kernel.dk designates 209.85.160.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=axboe@kernel.dk; dmarc=none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1731339759; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=73ssgFdf0K05DppDgVzWtVNKq9nJj5zv7roJuuuIx3g=; b=5rAU0tDc7KzZhHeDHtSjzmXQh4RhW+9k3BT2hVAsw90V9c89QlZvLB5JdUOyqsOvj2q9Hj nPcF6pVDeso+TI34A97SrdRmBAyfPEInRIsjSnFtQ1Bu58DWeBdW6bKotxZMWFC84qK0s0 YjTtmQ2CjyjSwLSw18ytznFt1eUIVtA= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1731339759; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=b9cklIoCdEfVNiHHIfKhXwMISssQIwBaQT9XTxWZ1/ZXShQE83juLrajV92Lsstz6s+pUZ bpyVACFD2BupabfVBPGx3n3/sdiQVTbeRwBGFwTLUGtZW7z0dshqd1+Hk5Ft1zpc2H9zrl HLDB4LBlclAQk4cMz3UjJ9zbxMTLtIE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel-dk.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.s=20230601 header.b=FlQjZgym; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of axboe@kernel.dk designates 209.85.160.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=axboe@kernel.dk; dmarc=none Received: by mail-oa1-f51.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-29066daf9e2so1953970fac.3 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 07:45:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1731339900; x=1731944700; darn=kvack.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:from:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=73ssgFdf0K05DppDgVzWtVNKq9nJj5zv7roJuuuIx3g=; b=FlQjZgymDrm6USqqfZf0v40URFHZcV7mJuQ4gOb2MQfOnApzzyZcEzbpTVUyx9l6V0 xw68tKK3B0vBW4+9jBFJyFGfgwh8Vzkovnkl3IKlJ4z1WFAZ7Cb00MJxzz/j0mjbVlB9 nm/uoqCkXiJ7ZxnupXXdjilJdwxDCh76QgIPifbP3pRCk8bMUItKuzCpTrMeIzHZ670i cWkgzxT580IPv02rZDD+7xZUEpqw5rzXwHVAegjnGyKKYf+2pXzly/hDnVsJQdpqQiXv g6Ybr+VgrJjqjV74O67+jTkfkk6ZhV+mPygHnB2mVDIxyEi9ecOni/SVtW0UVBEpCZed 4o2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1731339900; x=1731944700; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:content-language:references :cc:to:from:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=73ssgFdf0K05DppDgVzWtVNKq9nJj5zv7roJuuuIx3g=; b=vzZiSZzY2srAw7KqAZVS8p2wwDN1C2fs6umGGJmDBtrn25xliVaHijoRB/IzEhHNx1 PWG7Cqnfo8DfdnPA+7pZnI7Duj8TQMIJEcmcdMkX1mcelLCJv24XMUNN7opuuhy/XqpY KwDS4P7ko09UXLPTcc33eLxKhZVUmt3mwTQoav2PT1XPqxLlPslaY1B6YAQswKi8mmOn ZNTRlrRfa53Ydl9a7vQUDpfX9g+8Lmes4IEdjjJMzQ2kTb/EMnffoOSP87b27Nfi9fkm vxFMNrg+c3+HLjP2h7XeEaqv/0grf3LY8RDWfH8p60feBT2Q5oF0Xog7RDlOIzaiXWPy CZAA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXYoCUYlFx3tFgUJvu9B22DNX2NZrE03IEOw8Y0nO2vVDeps4TbTJcnOy7aqIGtxvKqHT5jHkQMBw==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxk+WFwcL/Rc51oQIPtXgJanmppwlhxG0SGJbM36yp76W6vI4NT g6eeZPjxm6miErf/LArvJtBFbHG3DnPlxd+BxuE02WGgGJ8olzyQ1PFHhysmGrM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGct0DwfdQWrfzr/2yAq/9rjCxV1evaxzSEQanMVwW7H3trOqI8hiKigcoXrAwQB+7/3SOOvg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:a78d:b0:277:c0a9:f00d with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-295600015c6mr8021748fac.4.1731339899750; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 07:44:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.116] ([96.43.243.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 586e51a60fabf-29546d1905csm2819313fac.29.2024.11.11.07.44.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Nov 2024 07:44:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <17b9b5e7-fdcd-4769-b429-a67ebd466c97@kernel.dk> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:44:58 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] fs: add read support for RWF_UNCACHED From: Jens Axboe To: Stefan Metzmacher , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, clm@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20241108174505.1214230-1-axboe@kernel.dk> <20241108174505.1214230-9-axboe@kernel.dk> <42d612bc-cd3e-46cf-b8d3-50b7c01a9b93@kernel.dk> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <42d612bc-cd3e-46cf-b8d3-50b7c01a9b93@kernel.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D38E11A0008 X-Stat-Signature: arykgqqyii9f6tt7756w4qcgekdhgpkf X-HE-Tag: 1731339849-272678 X-HE-Meta: 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 7s/lWiWF E2DxquQbRALjnX2VoklW0TWlMQOcRSPIUVhiuThOWw0+UKI2AkKvjSQYK9eMH6RmRgxhv74zWeZnbnjePwavYOCWkZV7Q0AzIiAelpHBJg0f/mk4hibX7yzYMrfZRZ6A4YOgxIyhEVPfsv+swbax0rtmMMN63ku9JKHcOS5TDnAyHNw6jMt9Hdk5m5AM0hzOLHchS5ipv3e5cy23xoTkr5ClZcuBCAlsZgdI/AE206ZxbaDAGEVicGGSGp8GG3NUlipkisL4rxG4QW941DX5TJVqudGPuBhBdK6+0IJxo/EWh/L/dgXFjqPkXtG9DR2bFvt4BqKmbjUb+URAVpEMXbYLv1qEAY52w3b0sa98kZDR3YEe/BLafHDcaeD4n7FzeJhkqqUMTv9wLqZuJ8SHgWrcFvg== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 11/11/24 7:10 AM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 11/11/24 6:04 AM, Stefan Metzmacher wrote: >> Hi Jens, >> >>> If the same test case is run with RWF_UNCACHED set for the buffered read, >>> the output looks as follows: >>> >>> Reading bs 65536, uncached 0 >>> 1s: 153144MB/sec >>> 2s: 156760MB/sec >>> 3s: 158110MB/sec >>> 4s: 158009MB/sec >>> 5s: 158043MB/sec >>> 6s: 157638MB/sec >>> 7s: 157999MB/sec >>> 8s: 158024MB/sec >>> 9s: 157764MB/sec >>> 10s: 157477MB/sec >>> 11s: 157417MB/sec >>> 12s: 157455MB/sec >>> 13s: 157233MB/sec >>> 14s: 156692MB/sec >>> >>> which is just chugging along at ~155GB/sec of read performance. Looking >>> at top, we see: >>> >>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND >>> 7961 root 20 0 267004 0 0 S 3180 0.0 5:37.95 uncached >>> 8024 axboe 20 0 14292 4096 0 R 1.0 0.0 0:00.13 top >>> >>> where just the test app is using CPU, no reclaim is taking place outside >>> of the main thread. Not only is performance 65% better, it's also using >>> half the CPU to do it. >> >> Do you have numbers of similar code using O_DIRECT just to >> see the impact of the memcpy from the page cache to the userspace >> buffer... > > I don't, but I can surely generate those. I didn't consider them that > interesting for this comparison which is why I didn't do them, O_DIRECT > reads for bigger blocks sizes (or even smaller block sizes, if using > io_uring + registered buffers) will definitely have lower overhead than > uncached and buffered IO. Copying 160GB/sec isn't free :-) > > For writes it's a bit more complicated to do an apples to apples > comparison, as uncached IO isn't synchronous like O_DIRECT is. It only > kicks off the IO, doesn't wait for it. Here's the read side - same test as above, using 64K reads: 1s: 24947MB/sec 2s: 24840MB/sec 3s: 24666MB/sec 4s: 24549MB/sec 5s: 24575MB/sec 6s: 24669MB/sec 7s: 24611MB/sec 8s: 24369MB/sec 9s: 24261MB/sec 10s: 24125MB/sec which is in fact pretty depressing. As before, this is 32 threads, each reading a file from separate XFS mount points, so 32 file systems in total. If I bump the read size to 128K, then it's about 42GB/sec. 256K gets you to 71-72GB/sec. Just goes to show you, you need parallellism to get the best performance out of the devices with O_DIRECT. If I run io_uring + dio + registered buffers, I can get ~172GB/sec out of reading the same 32 files from 32 threads. -- Jens Axboe