From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Yanhui Ma <yama@redhat.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
kashyap.desai@broadcom.com, chenxiang <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: plug request for shared sbitmap
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 13:54:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <108caf1d-c31d-2303-57a8-8fe0f7bde22b@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YKOiClSTyHl5lbXV@T590>
On 5/18/21 1:16 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 10:44:43AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 14/05/2021 03:20, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> In case of shared sbitmap, request won't be held in plug list any more
>>> sine commit 32bc15afed04 ("blk-mq: Facilitate a shared sbitmap per
>>> tagset"), this way makes request merge from flush plug list & batching
>>> submission not possible, so cause performance regression.
>>>
>>> Yanhui reports performance regression when running sequential IO
>>> test(libaio, 16 jobs, 8 depth for each job) in VM, and the VM disk
>>> is emulated with image stored on xfs/megaraid_sas.
>>>
>>> Fix the issue by recovering original behavior to allow to hold request
>>> in plug list.
>>
>> Hi Ming,
>>
>> Since testing v5.13-rc2, I noticed that this patch made the hang I was
>> seeing disappear:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/3d72d64d-314f-9d34-e039-7e508b2abe1b@huawei.com/
>>
>> I don't think that problem is solved, though.
>
> This kind of hang or lockup is usually related with cpu utilization, and
> this patch may reduce cpu utilization in submission context.
>
>>
>> So I wonder about throughput performance (I had hoped to test before it was
>> merged). I only have 6x SAS SSDs at hand, but I see some significant changes
>> (good and bad) for mq-deadline for hisi_sas:
>> Before 620K (read), 300K IOPs (randread)
>> After 430K (read), 460-490K IOPs (randread)
>
> 'Before 620K' could be caused by busy queue when batching submission isn't
> applied, so merge chance is increased. This patch applies batching
> submission, so queue becomes not busy enough.
>
> BTW, what is the queue depth of sdev and can_queue of shost for your hisilision SAS?
>
>>
>> none IO sched is always about 450K (read) and 500K (randread)
>>
>> Do you guys have any figures? Are my results as expected?
>
> In yanhui's virt workload(qemu, libaio, dio, high queue depth, single
> job), the patch can improve throughput much(>50%) when running
> sequential write(dio, libaio, 16 jobs) to XFS. And it is observed that
> IO merge is recovered to level of disabling host tags.
>
I've found a good testcase for this by using null_blk:
modprobe null_blk submit_queues=32 queue_mode=2 irqmode=0 bs=4096
hw_queue_depth=2048 completion_nsec=1 nr_devices=4 shared_tags=1
shared_tag_bitmap=1
and using a simple fio job with libaio and rw=read and numjobs=32 will
do the trick:
[nullb]
rw=read
size=16g
ioengine=libaio
direct=1
buffered=0
group_reporting=1
bs=4096
numjobs=32
(of course, the 'numjobs' and 'submit_queues' parameter would need to be
adjusted to your machine).
Omitting the 'shared_tag_bitmap' module parameter would yield around 12M
iops; adding it would see a rather dramatic drop to 172k iops.
With this patchset it's back to the expected iops value.
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-18 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-14 2:20 [PATCH] blk-mq: plug request for shared sbitmap Ming Lei
2021-05-14 14:59 ` Jens Axboe
2021-05-18 9:44 ` John Garry
2021-05-18 11:16 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-18 11:42 ` John Garry
2021-05-18 12:00 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-18 12:51 ` John Garry
2021-05-18 16:01 ` John Garry
2021-05-19 0:21 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-19 8:41 ` John Garry
2021-05-20 1:23 ` Ming Lei
2021-05-20 8:21 ` John Garry
2021-05-18 11:54 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2021-05-18 12:37 ` John Garry
2021-05-18 13:22 ` Hannes Reinecke
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=108caf1d-c31d-2303-57a8-8fe0f7bde22b@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chenxiang66@hisilicon.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=kashyap.desai@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=yama@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).