Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1174800

[PATCH 1/3] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched files

From Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject [PATCH 1/3] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched files
Date 2015-07-01 00:10 +0200
Message-ID <pHbT5-6y3-59@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>

I have a _tiny_ microbenchmark that sits in a loop and writes
single bytes to a file.  Writing one byte to a tmpfs file is
around 2x slower than reading one byte from a file, which is a
_bit_ more than I expecte.  This is a dumb benchmark, but I think
it's hard to deny that write() is a hot path and we should avoid
unnecessary overhead there.

I did a 'perf record' of 30-second samples of read and write.
The top item in a diffprofile is srcu_read_lock() from
fsnotify().  There are active inotify fd's from systemd, but
nothing is actually listening to the file or its part of
the filesystem.

I *think* we can avoid taking the srcu_read_lock() for the
common case where there are no actual marks on the file.
This means that there will both be nothing to notify for
*and* implies that there is no need for clearing the ignore
mask.

This patch gave a 13.1% speedup in writes/second on my test,
which is an improvement from the 10.8% that I saw with the
last version.

Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
Cc: John McCutchan <john@johnmccutchan.com>
Cc: Robert Love <rlove@rlove.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
---

 b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c |   10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff -puN fs/notify/fsnotify.c~optimize-fsnotify fs/notify/fsnotify.c
--- a/fs/notify/fsnotify.c~optimize-fsnotify	2015-06-30 15:03:56.819399401 -0700
+++ b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c	2015-06-30 15:03:56.822399536 -0700
@@ -205,6 +205,16 @@ int fsnotify(struct inode *to_tell, __u3
 		mnt = NULL;
 
 	/*
+	 * Optimization: srcu_read_lock() has a memory barrier which can
+	 * be expensive.  It protects walking the *_fsnotify_marks lists.
+	 * However, if we do not walk the lists, we do not have to do
+	 * SRCU because we have no references to any objects and do not
+	 * need SRCU to keep them "alive".
+	 */
+	if (hlist_empty(&to_tell->i_fsnotify_marks) &&
+	    (!mnt || hlist_empty(&mnt->mnt_fsnotify_marks)))
+		return 0;
+	/*
 	 * if this is a modify event we may need to clear the ignored masks
 	 * otherwise return if neither the inode nor the vfsmount care about
 	 * this type of event.
_
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextNext in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 1/3] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched files Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> - 2015-07-01 00:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 1/3] fs: optimize inotify/fsnotify code for unwatched  files Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2015-07-01 11:00 +0200

csiph-web