From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF231C43460 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF11861279 for ; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240882AbhDLJqb (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 05:46:31 -0400 Received: from mail-eopbgr770053.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.77.53]:58350 "EHLO NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241874AbhDLJjn (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 05:39:43 -0400 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=N5SazesYBIQyQDCqHJtovqLmzX6wkUKn+4DJUSqXfDKF+1+/upWD2YOlgOp52Flm+fZtz+bMpupAu25+lMU+9sHCuly2WVWP2G3OuhDNYiq8AfgAV5gMm2V6i3635MxZHyMrtsSkBoIMj+bdg/52HbqW+27MqizcekNiLr/mtbgzGapa/Eg5E3Kdwx5lCkSuHh3qarZOt/PdmMzAgLABvD3a3QIUbeK45EqPcjzBEtw6PNPOyNlmor98l/p3YK+IRJ1pfBCNU/IfrJtQieNneV5wCGiB3gXvb9QlFK4N7PWrQ/O/hq6rkl7/qy7E7Eu/R/6LwtJCKFhq9ZXEG2j5Xg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=QrM7m5aTXmcF0MhQVdjX6oKmvPoecGhjbql3Iz91hRE=; b=JOzuqXrF2UeMyXuN9CzZi9hXbRPJtpd5QY5QQ+9PJ4xhniX+5eaeaCKnlfFBqCHajUjI0hOiNGojZI3V3tSRip66It2Ku3HDPQws2wkM63M3U0yg4faTk3TyvJ8Y/koDCLyvaTOAZOLJ73Art/zc1a73A2Pd9dasJswrJxGcwI/Bh8k8RNeAWre/mlDBp0LB0n2pvLHX4xW7rcCoEeQL9BvIxfJi+f4zFdC7n5OjSevQdoR9gvsm3YD4ONcbPoTAckCv2I79ChBOUJjS+52oWflsi1y54Eu+Yeo4P3kcRf3V4ch0rwfgWlU40M4W87Llhu72VMmtg+mgluWQL796sQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 216.228.112.34) smtp.rcpttodomain=vger.kernel.org smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass (p=none sp=none pct=100) action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=none (message not signed); arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Nvidia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=QrM7m5aTXmcF0MhQVdjX6oKmvPoecGhjbql3Iz91hRE=; b=fG+1+C8rHNr9dl2gr33CoyrgAiS9YhUw1aNNR10F0h8Ngo5aARWGKwWCHb2fjKCQ34mcgIjX120nzjkP16B5qouUCEoGFPtnNU2UUr0XFpqJGTheckpCMc5VuCj8Q3WgTFNIlCjD403mESS2ItT1LJ3Jlcmk/PRwvMDJ81XpYiLziuY7KNqU7dMMNtF8Ur6FsZKJF5LmMmXc9v9QlXEEWuG97XMbXyhS1+Uk2aXsWeSNdpMmuV5VP758H2AP1SgCvi/fXxhKwFh7vVRRXJ39WWCDNMRnyfEJmz1J87h7m3cwSsZK/Fg+PbGH3Q+poIKjuYeVrchK5389GaaaqJW3QQ== Received: from DM5PR21CA0016.namprd21.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:ac::26) by BL1PR12MB5176.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:311::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4020.16; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:39:24 +0000 Received: from DM6NAM11FT016.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:ac:cafe::bc) by DM5PR21CA0016.outlook.office365.com (2603:10b6:3:ac::26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.4065.4 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:39:23 +0000 X-MS-Exchange-Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 216.228.112.34) smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; vger.kernel.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates 216.228.112.34 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com; client-ip=216.228.112.34; helo=mail.nvidia.com; Received: from mail.nvidia.com (216.228.112.34) by DM6NAM11FT016.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.13.173.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.4020.17 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:39:23 +0000 Received: from [172.27.0.90] (172.20.145.6) by HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:39:21 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] null_blk: add option for managing virtual boundary To: Damien Le Moal , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "axboe@kernel.dk" CC: "oren@nvidia.com" , "idanb@nvidia.com" , "yossike@nvidia.com" References: <20210411162658.251456-1-mgurtovoy@nvidia.com> From: Max Gurtovoy Message-ID: <1da0e414-f091-c266-3033-d39d26099a10@nvidia.com> Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:39:18 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [172.20.145.6] X-ClientProxiedBy: HQMAIL105.nvidia.com (172.20.187.12) To HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: cf02041c-0edd-4add-ae2e-08d8fd96db1c X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: BL1PR12MB5176: X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:7219; X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:216.228.112.34;CTRY:US;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:mail.nvidia.com;PTR:schybrid03.nvidia.com;CAT:NONE;SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(46966006)(36840700001)(82740400003)(36860700001)(86362001)(36906005)(316002)(16576012)(336012)(478600001)(70206006)(53546011)(6666004)(426003)(70586007)(2906002)(26005)(107886003)(7636003)(4326008)(8936002)(16526019)(36756003)(5660300002)(54906003)(82310400003)(31696002)(186003)(356005)(83380400001)(47076005)(110136005)(31686004)(8676002)(2616005)(43740500002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101; X-OriginatorOrg: Nvidia.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Apr 2021 09:39:23.4827 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: cf02041c-0edd-4add-ae2e-08d8fd96db1c X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.112.34];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com] X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DM6NAM11FT016.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL1PR12MB5176 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 4/12/2021 2:36 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 2021/04/12 8:34, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 2021/04/12 1:30, Max Gurtovoy wrote: >>> This will enable changing the virtual boundary of null blk devices. For >>> now, null blk devices didn't have any restriction on the scatter/gather >>> elements received from the block layer. Add a module parameter that will >>> control the virtual boundary. This will enable testing the efficiency of >>> the block layer bounce buffer in case a suitable application will send >>> discontiguous IO to the given device. >>> >>> Initial testing with patched FIO showed the following results (64 jobs, >>> 128 iodepth): >>> IO size READ (virt=false) READ (virt=true) Write (virt=false) Write (virt=true) >>> ---------- ------------------- ----------------- ------------------- ------------------- >>> 1k 10.7M 8482k 10.8M 8471k >>> 2k 10.4M 8266k 10.4M 8271k >>> 4k 10.4M 8274k 10.3M 8226k >>> 8k 10.2M 8131k 9800k 7933k >>> 16k 9567k 7764k 8081k 6828k >>> 32k 8865k 7309k 5570k 5153k >>> 64k 7695k 6586k 2682k 2617k >>> 128k 5346k 5489k 1320k 1296k >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Max Gurtovoy >>> --- >>> drivers/block/null_blk/main.c | 7 +++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c b/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c >>> index d6c821d48090..9ca80e38f7e5 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c >>> +++ b/drivers/block/null_blk/main.c >>> @@ -84,6 +84,10 @@ enum { >>> NULL_Q_MQ = 2, >>> }; >>> >>> +static bool g_virt_boundary = false; >>> +module_param_named(virt_boundary, g_virt_boundary, bool, 0444); >>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(virt_boundary, "Require a virtual boundary for the device. Default: False"); >>> + >>> static int g_no_sched; >>> module_param_named(no_sched, g_no_sched, int, 0444); >>> MODULE_PARM_DESC(no_sched, "No io scheduler"); >>> @@ -1880,6 +1884,9 @@ static int null_add_dev(struct nullb_device *dev) >>> BLK_DEF_MAX_SECTORS); >>> blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(nullb->q, dev->max_sectors); >>> >>> + if (g_virt_boundary) >>> + blk_queue_virt_boundary(nullb->q, PAGE_SIZE - 1); >>> + >>> null_config_discard(nullb); >>> >>> sprintf(nullb->disk_name, "nullb%d", nullb->index); >>> >> Looks good to me, but could you also add the configfs equivalent setting ? > Oops. Chaitanya already had pointed this out... Sorry about the noise :) Sure, I'll add it in v2. Thanks. > >