All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Do not pull requests from the scheduler when we cannot dispatch them
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 09:29:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKcM/TWxSAQv7KHg@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210520112528.16250-1-jack@suse.cz>

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 01:25:28PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Provided the device driver does not implement dispatch budget accounting
> (which only SCSI does) the loop in __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched() pulls
> requests from the IO scheduler as long as it is willing to give out any.
> That defeats scheduling heuristics inside the scheduler by creating
> false impression that the device can take more IO when it in fact
> cannot.

So hctx->dispatch_busy isn't set as true in this case?

> 
> For example with BFQ IO scheduler on top of virtio-blk device setting
> blkio cgroup weight has barely any impact on observed throughput of
> async IO because __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched() always sucks out all the
> IO queued in BFQ. BFQ first submits IO from higher weight cgroups but
> when that is all dispatched, it will give out IO of lower weight cgroups
> as well. And then we have to wait for all this IO to be dispatched to
> the disk (which means lot of it actually has to complete) before the
> IO scheduler is queried again for dispatching more requests. This
> completely destroys any service differentiation.
> 
> So grab request tag for a request pulled out of the IO scheduler already
> in __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched() and do not pull any more requests if we
> cannot get it because we are unlikely to be able to dispatch it. That
> way only single request is going to wait in the dispatch list for some
> tag to free.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
>  block/blk-mq-sched.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>  block/blk-mq.c       |  2 +-
>  block/blk-mq.h       |  2 ++
>  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> index 996a4b2f73aa..714e678f516a 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> @@ -168,9 +168,19 @@ static int __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
>  		 * in blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list().
>  		 */
>  		list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, &rq_list);
> +		count++;
>  		if (rq->mq_hctx != hctx)
>  			multi_hctxs = true;
> -	} while (++count < max_dispatch);
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * If we cannot get tag for the request, stop dequeueing
> +		 * requests from the IO scheduler. We are unlikely to be able
> +		 * to submit them anyway and it creates false impression for
> +		 * scheduling heuristics that the device can take more IO.
> +		 */
> +		if (!blk_mq_get_driver_tag(rq))
> +			break;

At default BFQ's queue depth is same with virtblk_queue_depth, both are
256, so looks you use non-default setting?

Also in case of running out of driver tag, hctx->dispatch_busy should have
been set as true for avoiding batching dequeuing, does the following
patch make a difference for you?


diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
index 045b6878b8c5..c2ce3091ad6e 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
@@ -107,6 +107,13 @@ static bool blk_mq_dispatch_hctx_list(struct list_head *rq_list)
 
 #define BLK_MQ_BUDGET_DELAY	3		/* ms units */
 
+static int blk_mq_sched_max_disaptch(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
+{
+	if (!hctx->dispatch_busy)
+		return hctx->queue->nr_requests;
+	return 1;
+}
+
 /*
  * Only SCSI implements .get_budget and .put_budget, and SCSI restarts
  * its queue by itself in its completion handler, so we don't need to
@@ -121,15 +128,9 @@ static int __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
 	struct elevator_queue *e = q->elevator;
 	bool multi_hctxs = false, run_queue = false;
 	bool dispatched = false, busy = false;
-	unsigned int max_dispatch;
 	LIST_HEAD(rq_list);
 	int count = 0;
 
-	if (hctx->dispatch_busy)
-		max_dispatch = 1;
-	else
-		max_dispatch = hctx->queue->nr_requests;
-
 	do {
 		struct request *rq;
 		int budget_token;
@@ -170,7 +171,7 @@ static int __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
 		list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, &rq_list);
 		if (rq->mq_hctx != hctx)
 			multi_hctxs = true;
-	} while (++count < max_dispatch);
+	} while (++count < blk_mq_sched_max_disaptch(hctx));
 
 	if (!count) {
 		if (run_queue)


Thanks,
Ming


  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-21  1:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-20 11:25 [PATCH] block: Do not pull requests from the scheduler when we cannot dispatch them Jan Kara
2021-05-21  1:29 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-05-21 11:20   ` Jan Kara
2021-05-21 11:27     ` Jan Kara
2021-05-21 13:18     ` Ming Lei
2021-06-02  9:25 ` Ming Lei
2021-06-03 10:45   ` Jan Kara

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=YKcM/TWxSAQv7KHg@T590 \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
    /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.