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 142C5D6D25F for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 04:22:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6F9946B0088; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:22:40 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 681F36B0089; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:22:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 4FC7C6B008C; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:22:40 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 309736B0088 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:22:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin02.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB8D11C82B7 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 04:22:39 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82834207596.02.7F1850F Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf18.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 655621C0004 for ; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 04:22:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf18.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=pDqOYNRb; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf18.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1732767755; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=uUP2UXpHlln7t3qt93HkHedixbf6ZRCDxiei+ZAQ30oK7vLfCdRgvjhQAosNa5+eE6EbfI SVGy4PvjjeIbl6aICdtbX1lQqXKQJQDlyouoWoV9hJxKejPxmGnBeIDFjz2Dng+802mcD/ XvBYeq/EdEzYRvjgSWhNagaNFqqQj7I= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf18.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=pDqOYNRb; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf18.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1732767755; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=Kphv4/yVKW1LfSI92pcNP8tujyuMuQa1i79yLRRZvZM=; b=G6Tl2JwPqGJaDy+yg6pIHAtM47hQPRsHd2H2p3htGW+vy1qeYoAP/3SQb41J36NBwy62J6 wdlQYnpquGXkavjmVJ5fjwOmxO8E9dvKrabXMnyGRP2UpT64TwIEjSAVxQ9ldFwAA+0fgh XxpYwNdl7WLSWYlrEDHt1W6JxH4UoP0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=Kphv4/yVKW1LfSI92pcNP8tujyuMuQa1i79yLRRZvZM=; b=pDqOYNRbAzs/QQ1J6MF9/a2k/p cCTbVbjhe6mBpSwa7RBwGBJQu8Cs1CPhFVAhb/W7u2QG1iv2urQM8UKtnLwpMtpcegara3QEmUkvy Hd9gXBBhheHzqaiX5O4uN/K+4y8zjJ4kPkJz0aj5/3Xvz4qmwuWAAa/oI8TWOI5jwyHXW1djO+ExJ ENvVJpvsmv9OkyOOACdw3YQsZaZZymzlfFFliwjyiphEEXaXAcncFIxaoIEKEnY0d1HTo5UkVt1+j DHx6lKWZ1tETTD5zNMBJ1J0a9Ar3Gm+WMnAZ+XDU1R+p8TWEBKjfaaoiK8zwGqhKYc6IiHHKt3UeK y8khfkOA==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tGW2y-00000002B5Z-2wSj; Thu, 28 Nov 2024 04:22:32 +0000 Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 04:22:32 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Bharata B Rao Cc: Mateusz Guzik , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, nikunj@amd.com, vbabka@suse.cz, david@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, yuzhao@google.com, axboe@kernel.dk, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, joshdon@google.com, clm@meta.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Large folios in block buffered IO path Message-ID: References: <20241127054737.33351-1-bharata@amd.com> <3947869f-90d4-4912-a42f-197147fe64f0@amd.com> <5a517b3a-51b2-45d6-bea3-4a64b75dfd30@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5a517b3a-51b2-45d6-bea3-4a64b75dfd30@amd.com> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 655621C0004 X-Stat-Signature: 6id73p7fbd3pqq5rojmhwuf81wrri8tk X-HE-Tag: 1732767753-759544 X-HE-Meta: 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 aFuV9yDv 36t2nayPYpcVrDQZ+/ZuhSIUfSzz62rfREKOf68EqDhfWcm3QkHqnxrQ+hD++ETFCSmf6L9VQ4k6o7vGUBFZO/ELjxgdlOFyDndjx6KNUfqpNzbn6mjutJkHe76xyC+kDYDa0dIQ0OOaYMn8MvFMeKVbiEYZN2vdOI4zxWYsUzZGnzupu9Ge/3Fce0www1i+koHYB 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 Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 09:31:50AM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > However a point of concern is that FIO bandwidth comes down drastically > after the change. > > default inode_lock-fix > rw=30% > Instance 1 r=55.7GiB/s,w=23.9GiB/s r=9616MiB/s,w=4121MiB/s > Instance 2 r=38.5GiB/s,w=16.5GiB/s r=8482MiB/s,w=3635MiB/s > Instance 3 r=37.5GiB/s,w=16.1GiB/s r=8609MiB/s,w=3690MiB/s > Instance 4 r=37.4GiB/s,w=16.0GiB/s r=8486MiB/s,w=3637MiB/s Something this dramatic usually only happens when you enable a debugging option. Can you recheck that you're running both A and B with the same debugging options both compiled in, and enabled?