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 171C8C25B78 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 02:22:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9E9D16B008C; Wed, 22 May 2024 22:22:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 99ADA6B0092; Wed, 22 May 2024 22:22:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 861216B0093; Wed, 22 May 2024 22:22:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683E86B008C for ; Wed, 22 May 2024 22:22:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60861C01C8 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 02:22:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82148061156.21.E78BEE1 Received: from mail-yb1-f179.google.com (mail-yb1-f179.google.com [209.85.219.179]) by imf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF4F180004 for ; Thu, 23 May 2024 02:22:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=cQI3Txvd; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of laoar.shao@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=laoar.shao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1716430937; 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=NQDfZ0LPwhJX3/QNF0EEJO3WCRe9zAijIGwiWSjHPuo=; b=PjOfBHtcx/NwOz34gXXCiyJGbj60fdbAKgsnToriv+tawZvC8o0eeb0tbBdJ6Ql4OglTq8 PI1ugote1bcWxc8kXHxTNBtjpl0xWoNe9Fk04pkP7A319Et6Ly3D1TtRzEORGogCkpejYY NemEM7MrwTbFkfTDEgCa5NcKDJ8FFmE= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1716430937; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=DBWTswgzwHy1SDntXa7N4EVxkzqmwH8te7SsTpkUyzTTuZNSnx02uvOeTSiAgRQQytz/aU nun/vcRmlvpcHg8oeKnrQqZQEM+ei/aauEDsQqV/eEdqITRwzEAQuNAPIz04j5w+SoSvxC 9Jqtv1h4c3LHs4DznFTbcFcxM3csYPk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf06.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20230601 header.b=cQI3Txvd; spf=pass (imf06.hostedemail.com: domain of laoar.shao@gmail.com designates 209.85.219.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=laoar.shao@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com Received: by mail-yb1-f179.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-df4d60c59f7so1661563276.3 for ; Wed, 22 May 2024 19:22:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1716430936; x=1717035736; darn=kvack.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=NQDfZ0LPwhJX3/QNF0EEJO3WCRe9zAijIGwiWSjHPuo=; b=cQI3Txvdixw9SE4aEdUnDtnlpuC7ugnl0B9KiElr1BZ5xqH//ceZLQL7xnb4PHvy8D clb+eKyQABLK8ovcMLOJhJG5UiF2J23Uplz4W0FIY/EzcM5MZheYp2vlm1P+WEB1ejvt YV87CynylDc6zR7z0qpP5MyRX7+Q9mAcFmMLPbaQv3ncYOdSmK6a1sKkGecUMnMAlotV IX/IYFGcADl4PZEmR+UmnLyGh6zbaQzo0nmYMf4XjUUP7FwaxF0wQOg6OTy7Un+lQI8e S4otgBjXsH5UEYpQXUDwqd5CJHx/L4uzNs60ErtLqj7Dod8rus6svlMDRYCbd6oGn8B0 in0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1716430936; x=1717035736; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=NQDfZ0LPwhJX3/QNF0EEJO3WCRe9zAijIGwiWSjHPuo=; b=KENKZfbfPl/L4mv1kF2LGyCoTnjBIyHezoKbIhOnAFwecgG8XLo+udLQrdNIub3Ejr jQ3BlJhsFkliGD3bLtYjeWp3jO7hmgA/FlPZZbPWvgeifWZBaeDOhR7ntoJYNCGTqz53 NS6cPTSBmmaXkwO9wUDDM11OT9E1K+L1Lnc5ol6Fpij1hooUI4a3m9mzcSGLL6g/zXcj U0D1OY/peLc+nfRT9f/mOpxhQJDf6pzaraRiYfxz2w4imz4cOchhxpdjzrNmhHQa3zUP zUB4Gn0kbQabf0G+Q8U1BCNnaWt58TjTPvZf6vzXUCEDwB06trce5gCnT4HiP/pPqT2R LF1w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV/kNAo484A9+/SPdPLEEBwSxlA+bco5Y8Ln9VO0HOutBv3+8FlfD+MC8Jo+TP3ufTCu8rcK5yW9r53tY9C+4OMTZc= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxKxnOFWj+9lZf3eSoY8gAduDKG8UtQLZQ5xfXzOlOx1S/Nk6wY StO+a3InQZDvr1lcpGdx9kFtNj3rBT/G1fjwHFmC+rzXJw3fOlHHufF40pTFuJFVnWm9/6hvPcH uIGfcRPjd9T9OnLQuyqBF2QEPLeA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGIrKWhqy/R8UjLEd99c1CXhskhEggyC5D4DvABYvRnP5ifskPb85lAwQfQ0fLDLvAUpyNvgP63eumMfAsRfuk= X-Received: by 2002:a25:d090:0:b0:de5:8290:35b8 with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-df4e0ad024cmr4216897276.32.1716430935914; Wed, 22 May 2024 19:22:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240515091727.22034-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yafang Shao Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 10:21:39 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Delete the associated dentry when deleting a file To: Oliver Sang Cc: Linus Torvalds , brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, longman@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, walters@verbum.org, wangkai86@huawei.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com, philip.li@intel.com, yujie.liu@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: EAF4F180004 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: zr5cj7w41i3eicf8i78ubexnykmbx3s6 X-HE-Tag: 1716430936-982375 X-HE-Meta: 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 pWcnHbRz jresJOkEWwKWiFXYfG+lpwo0YHFOZwCroJizf5H+mg5Jtd7OBWOAACP6hnsdtU6UCz4ausVUTWqx1Zjj/tuq820NJX2XgFr4ouaww5ksLvVGEXfutGzr4ur8yqOMnnRuDCMeG9+M4CeLN5QmH1VoLFhhuX0KN81SFcbUB70COYlv+UHmGnw339al8D4GbgpsLCmp67iGivVqxcBrHRRPFYDwZX1J06lObEdEMU75C0HfcFINi2EiY+6UcCeUU3XYYIqXmx9TfM01s4HM0zT+nYyiZakkTp7hLa/cank02YZUESQxma2ZEmVVuqxYkE+fsrTMuuJEf67C/VAwq8MSTdlJL+jam3zHFJvDzIRmXeXHXQPyIFAliqFk09g84U+0ZCSkERAzwYWlVsDf4veN1lIDril2FPSmeXpRzvYjZAzQFj3cFMTlArqp8DFW9S4QrzGY7v9JZEQjRNztdOa9e2P4XWphU66pVES63uswasvzFp2g= 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 Wed, May 22, 2024 at 4:51=E2=80=AFPM Oliver Sang = wrote: > > > hi, Linus, hi, Yafang Shao, > > > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:05:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Oliver, > > is there any chance you could run this through the test robot > > performance suite? The original full patch at > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240515091727.22034-1-laoar.shao@gmail= .com/ > > > > and it would be interesting if the test robot could see if the patch > > makes any difference on any other loads? > > > > we just reported a stress-ng performance improvement by this patch [1] Awesome! > > test robot applied this patch upon > 3c999d1ae3 ("Merge tag 'wq-for-6.10' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/li= nux/kernel/git/tj/wq") > > filesystem is not our team's major domain, so we just made some limited r= eview > of the results, and decided to send out the report FYI. > > at first stage, we decided to check below catagories of tests as priority= : > > stress-ng filesystem > filebench mailserver > reaim fileserver > > we also pick sysbench-fileio, blogbench into coverage. > > here is a summary. > > for stress-ng, besided [1] which was reported, we got below data that are > about this patch comparing to 3c999d1ae3. > > either there is no significant performance change, or the change is small= er > than the noise which will make test robot's bisect fail, so these informa= tion > is just FYI. and if you have any doubt about any subtests, could you let = us know > then we could check further? > > (also included some net test results) > > 12.87 =C4=85 6% -0.6% 12.79 stress-ng.xattr.ops_p= er_sec > 6721 =C4=85 5% +7.5% 7224 =C4=85 27% stress-ng.rawdev= .ops_per_sec > 9002 =C4=85 7% -8.7% 8217 stress-ng.dirmany.ops= _per_sec > 8594743 =C4=85 4% -3.0% 8337417 stress-ng.rawsock.ops= _per_sec > 2056 =C4=85 3% +2.9% 2116 stress-ng.dirdeep.ops= _per_sec > 4307 =C4=85 21% -6.9% 4009 stress-ng.dir.ops_per= _sec > 137946 =C4=85 18% +5.8% 145942 stress-ng.fiemap.ops_= per_sec > 22413006 =C4=85 2% +2.5% 22982512 =C4=85 2% stress-ng.sockdi= ag.ops_per_sec > 286714 =C4=85 2% -3.8% 275876 =C4=85 5% stress-ng.udp-fl= ood.ops_per_sec > 82904 =C4=85 46% -31.6% 56716 stress-ng.sctp.ops_pe= r_sec > 9853408 -0.3% 9826387 stress-ng.ping-sock.ops_pe= r_sec > 84667 =C4=85 12% -26.7% 62050 =C4=85 17% stress-ng.dccp.o= ps_per_sec > 61750 =C4=85 25% -24.2% 46821 =C4=85 38% stress-ng.open.o= ps_per_sec > 583443 =C4=85 3% -3.4% 563822 stress-ng.file-ioctl.= ops_per_sec > 11919 =C4=85 28% -34.3% 7833 stress-ng.dentry.ops_= per_sec > 18.59 =C4=85 12% -23.9% 14.15 =C4=85 27% stress-ng.swap.o= ps_per_sec > 246.37 =C4=85 2% +15.9% 285.58 =C4=85 12% stress-ng.aiol.o= ps_per_sec > 7.45 -4.8% 7.10 =C4=85 7% stress-ng.fallocate.o= ps_per_sec > 207.97 =C4=85 7% +5.2% 218.70 stress-ng.copy-file.o= ps_per_sec > 69.87 =C4=85 7% +5.8% 73.93 =C4=85 5% stress-ng.fpunch= .ops_per_sec > 0.25 =C4=85 21% +24.0% 0.31 stress-ng.inode-flags= .ops_per_sec > 849.35 =C4=85 6% +1.4% 861.51 stress-ng.mknod.ops_p= er_sec > 926144 =C4=85 4% -5.2% 877558 stress-ng.lease.ops_p= er_sec > 82924 -2.1% 81220 stress-ng.fcntl.ops_per_se= c > 6.19 =C4=85124% -50.7% 3.05 stress-ng.chattr.ops_= per_sec > 676.90 =C4=85 4% -1.9% 663.94 =C4=85 5% stress-ng.iomix.= ops_per_sec > 0.93 =C4=85 6% +5.6% 0.98 =C4=85 7% stress-ng.symlin= k.ops_per_sec > 1703608 -3.8% 1639057 =C4=85 3% stress-ng.eventfd.ops= _per_sec > 1735861 -0.6% 1726072 stress-ng.sockpair.ops_per= _sec > 85440 -2.0% 83705 stress-ng.rawudp.ops_per_s= ec > 6198 +0.6% 6236 stress-ng.sockabuse.ops_pe= r_sec > 39226 +0.0% 39234 stress-ng.sock.ops_per_sec > 1358 +0.3% 1363 stress-ng.tun.ops_per_sec > 9794021 -1.7% 9623340 stress-ng.icmp-flood.ops_p= er_sec > 1324728 +0.3% 1328244 stress-ng.epoll.ops_per_se= c > 146150 -2.0% 143231 stress-ng.rawpkt.ops_per_s= ec > 6381112 -0.4% 6352696 stress-ng.udp.ops_per_sec > 1234258 +0.2% 1236738 stress-ng.sockfd.ops_per_s= ec > 23954 -0.1% 23932 stress-ng.sockmany.ops_per= _sec > 257030 -0.1% 256860 stress-ng.netdev.ops_per_s= ec > 6337097 +0.1% 6341130 stress-ng.flock.ops_per_se= c > 173212 -0.3% 172728 stress-ng.rename.ops_per_s= ec > 199.69 +0.6% 200.82 stress-ng.sync-file.ops_pe= r_sec > 606.57 +0.8% 611.53 stress-ng.chown.ops_per_se= c > 183549 -0.9% 181975 stress-ng.handle.ops_per_s= ec > 1299 +0.0% 1299 stress-ng.hdd.ops_per_sec > 98371066 +0.2% 98571113 stress-ng.lockofd.ops_per_= sec > 25.49 -4.3% 24.39 stress-ng.ioprio.ops_per_s= ec > 96745191 -1.5% 95333632 stress-ng.locka.ops_per_se= c > 582.35 +0.1% 582.86 stress-ng.chmod.ops_per_se= c > 2075897 -2.2% 2029552 stress-ng.getdent.ops_per_= sec > 60.47 -1.9% 59.34 stress-ng.metamix.ops_per_= sec > 14161 -0.3% 14123 stress-ng.io.ops_per_sec > 23.98 -1.5% 23.61 stress-ng.link.ops_per_sec > 27514 +0.0% 27528 stress-ng.filename.ops_per= _sec > 44955 +1.6% 45678 stress-ng.dnotify.ops_per_= sec > 160.94 +0.4% 161.51 stress-ng.inotify.ops_per_= sec > 2452224 +4.0% 2549607 stress-ng.lockf.ops_per_se= c > 6761 +0.3% 6779 stress-ng.fsize.ops_per_se= c > 775083 -1.5% 763487 stress-ng.fanotify.ops_per= _sec > 309124 -4.2% 296285 stress-ng.utime.ops_per_se= c > 25567 -0.1% 25530 stress-ng.dup.ops_per_sec > 1858 +0.9% 1876 stress-ng.procfs.ops_per_s= ec > 105804 -3.9% 101658 stress-ng.access.ops_per_s= ec > 1.04 -1.9% 1.02 stress-ng.chdir.ops_per_se= c > 82753 -0.3% 82480 stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_se= c > 681128 +3.7% 706375 stress-ng.acl.ops_per_sec > 11892 -0.1% 11875 stress-ng.bind-mount.ops_p= er_sec > > > for filebench, similar results, but data is less unstable than stress-ng,= which > means for most of them, we regarded them as that they should not be impac= ted by > this patch. > > for reaim/sysbench-fileio/blogbench, the data are quite stable, and we di= dn't > notice any significant performance changes. we even doubt whether they go > through the code path changed by this patch. > > so for these, we don't list full results here. > > BTW, besides filesystem tests, this patch is also piped into other perfor= mance > test categories such like net, scheduler, mm and others, and since it als= o goes > into our so-called hourly kernels, it could run by full other performance= test > suites which test robot supports. so in following 2-3 weeks, it's still p= ossible > for us to report other results including regression. > That's great. Many thanks for your help. --=20 Regards Yafang