From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Always complete remote completions requests in softirq
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 09:54:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6d9a1201-0de3-5b9d-4a4b-6b076bf4bc45@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201217164939.z4zjhycpxsyqvvcd@beryllium.lan>
On 12/17/20 9:49 AM, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 09:45:47AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 12/8/20 1:44 AM, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>>> It looks like the patched version show tiny bit better numbers for this
>>> workload. slat seems to be one of the major difference between the two
>>> runs. But that is the only thing I really spotted to be really off.
>>
>> slat is the same, just one is in nsec and the other is in usec.
>
> Ah, good eyes. Need to remember this :)
>
>>> I keep going with some more testing. Let what kind of tests you would
>>> also want to see. I'll do a few plain NVMe tests next.
>>
>> This is a good test, thanks.
>
> Got sidetracked. Haven't started yet with these tests.
I just ran some here, and as expected, didn't see much change. Single
core IOPS at 2.8M in both cases, and not expecting any remote IPI for
that test case.
So I'd say that's good enough, wasn't expecting a change, and we don't
see one even for your case with remote IPI.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-17 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-04 19:13 [PATCH 0/3 v2] blk-mq: Don't complete in IRQ, use llist_head Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-04 19:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] blk-mq: Don't complete on a remote CPU in force threaded mode Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 13:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-04 19:13 ` [PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Always complete remote completions requests in softirq Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-07 23:52 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-08 8:22 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 8:44 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-08 11:36 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-08 11:49 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 12:41 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-08 12:52 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 12:57 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 13:27 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 16:45 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-17 16:49 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 16:54 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-12-08 13:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-17 16:43 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-17 16:55 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-17 16:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-17 17:05 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 18:16 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 18:22 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-17 18:41 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 18:46 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-17 19:07 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-17 19:13 ` Jens Axboe
2020-12-17 19:15 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-12-04 19:13 ` [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 13:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-08 13:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-14 20:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-01-23 20:10 [PATCH v3 0/3] blk-mq: Don't complete in IRQ, use llist_head Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-23 20:10 ` [PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Always complete remote completions requests in softirq Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-25 7:10 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-01-25 8:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-25 8:30 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-25 8:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-25 9:29 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-25 8:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-25 8:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-27 11:22 ` Daniel Wagner
2020-10-28 6:56 [PATCH RFC] blk-mq: Don't IPI requests on PREEMPT_RT Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 14:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] blk-mq: Don't complete on a remote CPU in force threaded mode Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 14:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Always complete remote completions requests in softirq Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=6d9a1201-0de3-5b9d-4a4b-6b076bf4bc45@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).