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


Groups > linux.kernel > #1598535

Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace

From Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace
Date 2017-03-12 03:40 +0100
Message-ID <tk1Al-3lE-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <tjX3H-fX-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tk0uB-2J5-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tk1h0-3eX-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 06:16:55PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi Al,
> 
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 01:24:15AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 01:45:55PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> > > 
> > > I found that statx() was significantly slower than stat().  As a
> > > microbenchmark, I compared 10,000,000 invocations of fstat() on a tmpfs
> > > file to the same with statx() passed a NULL path:
> > 
> > Umm...
> > 
> 
> Well, it's a silly benchmark, but stat performance is important, and usually
> things are cached already so most of the time is just overhead --- which this
> measures.  And since nothing actually uses statx() yet, you can't do a benchmark
> just by running some command like 'git status' or whatever.

Oh, I agree that multiple __put_user() are wrong; I also agree that bulk copy is
the right approach (when we get the unsafe stuff right, we can revisit that, but
I suspect that on quite a few architectures a bulk copy will still give better
time, no matter what).

> If padding is a concern at all (AFAICS it's not actually an issue now with
> struct statx, but people tend to have different opinions on how careful they
> want to be with padding), then I think we'll just have to start by memsetting
> the whole struct to 0.

My point is simply that it's worth a comment in that code.

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


Thread

[PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 22:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2017-03-12 02:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 03:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2017-03-12 03:40 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 05:10 +0100
          Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-12 07:10 +0100
            Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Andreas Dilger <adilger@dilger.ca> - 2017-03-13 05:40 +0100
              Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> - 2017-03-13 11:30 +0100
                Re: [PATCH v2] statx: optimize copy of struct statx to userspace Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com> - 2017-03-13 19:20 +0100

csiph-web