linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>
To: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] block, bfq: consider request size in bfq_asymmetric_scenario()
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:36:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <68A2B4C8-48A5-45F3-8782-2440C0028161@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <143fa1a2-de5f-b18a-73d9-8e105844709c@huawei.com>



> Il giorno 7 set 2021, alle ore 13:29, yukuai (C) <yukuai3@huawei.com> ha scritto:
> 
> On 2021/08/27 1:00, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>> Il giorno 6 ago 2021, alle ore 04:08, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> ha scritto:
>>> 
>>> There is a special case when bfq do not need to idle when more than
>>> one groups is active:
>>> 
>> Unfortunately, there is a misunderstanding here.  If more than one
>> group is active, then idling is not needed only if a lot of symmetry
>> conditions also hold:
>> - all active groups have the same weight
>> - all active groups contain the same number of active queues
> 
> Hi, Paolo
> 
> I didn't think of this contition.
> 
> It's seems that if we want to idle when more than one group is active,
> there are two additional conditions:
> 
> - all dispatched requests have the same size
> - all active groups contain the same number of active queues
> 

Also the weights and the I/O priorities of the queues inside the
groups needs to be controlled, unfortunately.

> Thus we still need to track how many queues are active in each group.
> The conditions seems to be too much, do you think is it worth it to
> add support to idle when more than one group is active?
> 

I think I see your point.  The problem is that these states are
dynamic.  So, if we suspend tracking all the above information while
more than one group is active, then we are with no state in case only
one group remains active.

Thanks,
Paolo

> Thanks
> Kuai
> 
>> - all active queues have the same weight
>> - all active queues belong to the same I/O-priority class
>> - all dispatched requests have the same size
>> Similarly, if only one group is active, then idling is not needed only
>> if the above last three conditions hold.
>> The current logic, including your changes up to your previous patch,
>> is simply ignoring the last condition above.
>> So, unfortunately, your extra information about varied request size
>> should be used in the opposite way than how you propose to use it.


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-15  7:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-06  2:08 [PATCH v2 0/4] optimize the bfq queue idle judgment Yu Kuai
2021-08-06  2:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] block, bfq: add support to track if root_group have any pending requests Yu Kuai
2021-08-26 17:00   ` Paolo Valente
2021-09-02 13:23     ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-06  2:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated Yu Kuai
2021-08-26 17:00   ` Paolo Valente
2021-09-02 13:31     ` yukuai (C)
2021-09-07  9:10       ` Paolo Valente
2021-09-07 11:19         ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-06  2:08 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] block, bfq: add support to record request size information Yu Kuai
2021-08-26 17:00   ` Paolo Valente
2021-08-06  2:08 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] block, bfq: consider request size in bfq_asymmetric_scenario() Yu Kuai
2021-08-26 17:00   ` Paolo Valente
2021-09-07 11:29     ` yukuai (C)
2021-09-15  7:36       ` Paolo Valente [this message]
2021-09-15  7:47         ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-14  2:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] optimize the bfq queue idle judgment yukuai (C)
2021-08-24 14:09   ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-26 16:59 ` Paolo Valente

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=68A2B4C8-48A5-45F3-8782-2440C0028161@linaro.org \
    --to=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.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).