From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>,
Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] block/mq-deadline: Prioritize high-priority requests
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:24:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7b75c6bf-b446-2883-a571-d6ec3e99d575@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <844fdda0-37d2-4335-d755-1348482201a9@acm.org>
On 3/27/22 19:20, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Thanks, this helps a lot. can_queue = 1 as I was suspecting. In a quick
> test I noticed that I/O is about 10x slower for queue depth 1 and the
> v5.17 mq-deadline scheduler. I will take a closer look at this tomorrow.
An update: I can reproduce the slowness with (a) the patch at the start of
this thread reverted and (b) both the BFQ and the Kyber I/O schedulers. So
it seems like a regression has been introduced related to handling of queue
depth 1. I will try to bisect this.
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-28 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-27 22:03 [PATCH v2 0/4] Restore I/O priority support in the mq-deadline scheduler Bart Van Assche
2021-09-27 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] block/mq-deadline: Improve request accounting further Bart Van Assche
2021-09-28 5:45 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-09-27 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] block/mq-deadline: Add an invariant check Bart Van Assche
2021-09-28 5:47 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-09-27 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] block/mq-deadline: Stop using per-CPU counters Bart Van Assche
2021-09-28 5:51 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-09-28 17:35 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-27 22:03 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] block/mq-deadline: Prioritize high-priority requests Bart Van Assche
2021-09-27 22:53 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-09-27 23:12 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-28 5:53 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-09-28 10:36 ` Niklas Cassel
2022-03-25 12:33 ` Oleksij Rempel
2022-03-25 13:07 ` Oleksij Rempel
2022-03-25 17:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-03-26 8:57 ` Oleksij Rempel
2022-03-28 2:20 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-03-28 22:24 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2022-03-29 4:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-27 23:14 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Restore I/O priority support in the mq-deadline scheduler Jens Axboe
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=7b75c6bf-b446-2883-a571-d6ec3e99d575@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.