linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: commit 01e99aeca397 causes longer runtime of block/004
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 17:53:44 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200304095344.GA10390@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200304061137.l4hdqdt2dvs7dxgz@shindev.dhcp.fujisawa.hgst.com>

On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 06:11:37AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> On Mar 04, 2020 / 11:46, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 02:38:43AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > > I noticed that blktests block/004 takes longer runtime with 5.6-rc4 than
> > > 5.6-rc3, and found that the commit 01e99aeca397 ("blk-mq: insert passthrough
> > > request into hctx->dispatch directly") triggers it.
> > > 
> > > The longer runtime was observed with dm-linear device which maps SATA SMR HDD
> > > connected via AHCI. It was not observed with dm-linear on SAS/SATA SMR HDDs
> > > connected via SAS-HBA. Not observed with dm-linear on non-SMR HDDs either.
> > > 
> > > Before the commit, block/004 took around 130 seconds. After the commit, it takes
> > > around 300 seconds. I need to dig in further details to understand why the
> > > commit makes the test case longer.
> > > 
> > > The test case block/004 does "flush intensive workload". Is this longer runtime
> > > expected?
> > 
> > The following patch might address this issue:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20200207190416.99928-1-sqazi@google.com/#t
> > 
> > Please test and provide us the result.
> > 
> > thanks,
> > Ming
> >
> 
> Hi Ming,
> 
> I applied the patch to 5.6-rc4 but I observed the longer runtime of block/004.
> Still it takes around 300 seconds.

Hello Shinichiro,

block/004 only sends 1564 sync randwrite, and seems 130s has been slow
enough.

There are two related effect in that commit for your issue:

1) 'at_head' is applied in blk_mq_sched_insert_request() for flush
request

2) all IO is added back to tail of hctx->dispatch after .queue_rq()
returns STS_RESOURCE

Seems it is more related with 2) given you can't reproduce the issue on 
SAS.

So please test the following two patches, and see which one makes a
difference for you.

BTW, both two looks not reasonable, just for narrowing down the issue.

1) patch 1

diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
index 856356b1619e..86137c75283c 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
@@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ void blk_mq_sched_insert_request(struct request *rq, bool at_head,
 	WARN_ON(e && (rq->tag != -1));
 
 	if (blk_mq_sched_bypass_insert(hctx, !!e, rq)) {
-		blk_mq_request_bypass_insert(rq, at_head, false);
+		blk_mq_request_bypass_insert(rq, true, false);
 		goto run;
 	}


2) patch 2
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index d92088dec6c3..447d5cb39832 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -1286,7 +1286,7 @@ bool blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list(struct request_queue *q, struct list_head *list,
 			q->mq_ops->commit_rqs(hctx);
 
 		spin_lock(&hctx->lock);
-		list_splice_tail_init(list, &hctx->dispatch);
+		list_splice_init(list, &hctx->dispatch);
 		spin_unlock(&hctx->lock);
 
 		/*


Thanks,
Ming


  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-04  9:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-04  2:38 commit 01e99aeca397 causes longer runtime of block/004 Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-04  3:46 ` Ming Lei
2020-03-04  6:11   ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-04  9:53     ` Ming Lei [this message]
2020-03-05  1:19       ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-05  2:48         ` Ming Lei
2020-03-06  6:06           ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-06  8:13             ` Ming Lei
2020-03-07  1:02               ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-07  4:13                 ` Ming Lei
2020-03-09  0:07                   ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-09 16:14                     ` Ming Lei
2020-03-10  3:07                       ` Damien Le Moal
2020-03-10  5:54                         ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-10  6:00                           ` Damien Le Moal
2020-03-10  8:07                           ` Ming Lei
2020-03-10 11:07                             ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-10 13:37                               ` Ming Lei
2020-03-10 14:37                                 ` Ming Lei
2020-03-11  4:59                                   ` Shinichiro Kawasaki
2020-03-11  7:54                                     ` Ming Lei

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=20200304095344.GA10390@ming.t460p \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.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).