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
next prev parent 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).