Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 28 Feb 2023 13:58:56 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5] erofs: add per-cpu threads for decompression as an option | From | Gao Xiang <> |
| |
On 2023/2/28 13:51, Sandeep Dhavale wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 9:01 PM Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Sandeep, >> >> On 2023/2/28 12:47, Sandeep Dhavale via Linux-erofs wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> I completed the tests and the results are consistent with >>> our previous observation. We can see that removing WQ_UNBOUND >>> helps but the scheduling latency by using high priority per cpu >>> kthreads is even lower. Below is the table. >>> >>> |---------------------+-------+-------+------+-------| >>> | Table | avg | med | min | max | >>> |---------------------+-------+-------+------+-------| >>> | Default erofs | 19323 | 19758 | 3986 | 35051 | >>> |---------------------+-------+-------+------+-------| >>> | !WQ_UNBOUND | 11202 | 10798 | 3493 | 19822 | >>> |---------------------+-------+-------+------+-------| >>> | hipri pcpu kthreads | 7182 | 7017 | 2463 | 12300 | >>> |---------------------+-------+-------+------+-------| >> >> May I ask did it test with different setup since the test results >> in the original commit message are: >> > Hi Gao, > Yes I did the test on the different (older) hardware than my original testing > (but the same one Nathan had used) to remove that as a variable.
Ok, good to know that.
> > Thanks, > Sandeep. > >> +-------------------------+-----------+----------------+---------+ >> | | workqueue | kthread_worker | diff | >> +-------------------------+-----------+----------------+---------+ >> | Average (us) | 15253 | 2914 | -80.89% | >> | Median (us) | 14001 | 2912 | -79.20% | >> | Minimum (us) | 3117 | 1027 | -67.05% | >> | Maximum (us) | 30170 | 3805 | -87.39% | >> | Standard deviation (us) | 7166 | 359 | | >> +-------------------------+-----------+----------------+---------+ >> >> Otherwise it looks good to me for now, hopefully helpful to Android >> users. >> >> Thanks, >> Gao Xiang >> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Sandeep.
| |