linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Mingyu He <mingyu.he@shopee.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org, clm@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kirill@shutemov.name, bfoster@redhat.com,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	littleswimmingwhale@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [ISSUE] Read performance regression when using RWF_DONTCACHE form 8026e49 "mm/filemap: add read support for RWF_DONTCACHE"
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 14:49:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ad-XUOoN3wj-PnRC@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAoBcuSK38z5Nh7rGuHDFwpNvtc0W49OZKc1_d1QkCbK_nL7Ew@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 03:28:27PM +0800, Mingyu He wrote:
> I found this feature quite useful because in many scenarios, files
> only need to be read once and then discarded. Keeping them in the page
> cache can lead to a drop in read performance during cache reclaim.
> Therefore, I conducted functional tests after the official release of
> v7.0.0. I found that in normal preadv2 read scenarios (write has not
> been tested yet), the read performance actually has a significant
> regression. I would like to discuss whether this is expected, or if my
> usage or application scenario is incorrect.

Your entire premise is wrong.  This is not a magic "make I/O go faster" 
flag.  Comparing it to cached I/O is entirely wrong; your workload
clearly benefits from readahead and you've asked to not do readahead
by specifying RWF_DONTCACHE.

Rather you should compare against O_DIRECT reads.


      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-04-15 13:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-15  7:28 Mingyu He
2026-04-15 10:05 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-04-15 11:04   ` Mingyu He
2026-04-15 13:49 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ad-XUOoN3wj-PnRC@casper.infradead.org \
    --to=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
    --cc=clm@meta.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=littleswimmingwhale@gmail.com \
    --cc=mingyu.he@shopee.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox