On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 10:32:36AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > >> I've measured the kernel decompression speed using QEMU before and after
> > >> this patch for the x86_64 and i386 architectures. The speed-up is about
> > >> 10x as shown below.
> > >> 
> > >> Code     Arch    Kernel Size     Time    Speed
> > >> v5.8     x86_64  11504832 B      148 ms   79 MB/s
> > >> patch    x86_64  11503872 B       13 ms  885 MB/s
> > >> v5.8     i386     9621216 B       91 ms  106 MB/s
> > >> patch    i386     9620224 B       10 ms  962 MB/s
> > >> 
> > >> I also measured the time to decompress the initramfs on x86_64, i386,
> > >> and arm. All three show the same decompression speed before and after,
> > >> as expected.
> > >> 
> > >> [1] https://github.com/lz4/lz4/pull/890
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > Hi Nick, would you be able to test the below patch's performance to
> > > verify it gives the same speedup? It removes the #undef in misc.c which
> > > causes the decompressors to not use the builtin version. It should be
> > > equivalent to yours except for applying it to all the decompressors.
> > > 
> > > Thanks.
> > 
> > I will measure it. I would expect it to provide the same speed up. It would 
> > be great to fix
> > the problem for x86/i386 in general.
> > 
> > But, I believe that this is also a problem for ARM, though I have a hard 
> > time measuring
> > because I can’t get pre-boot print statements in QEMU. I will attempt to 
> > take a look at the
> > assembly, because I’m fairly certain that memcpy() isn’t inlined in master.
> > 
> > Even if we fix all the architectures, I would still like to merge the LZ4 
> > patch. It seems like it
> > is pretty easy to merge a patch that is a boot speed regression, because 
> > people aren’t
> > actively measuring it. So I prefer a layered defense.
> 
> 
> Layered defense against performance-only problem, happening on
> emulation-only?
> 
> IMO that's a bit of overkill.
> 
> Best regards,
>                                                                       Pavel
> -- 
> (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
> (cesky, pictures) 
> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Why would it be emulation-only? QEMU is just being used for ease of
testing, but the performance impact should be similar on bare metal.

Thanks.

Reply via email to