linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>
To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>, Changheun Lee <nanich.lee@samsung.com>
Cc: Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	"jisoo2146.oh@samsung.com" <jisoo2146.oh@samsung.com>,
	"junho89.kim@samsung.com" <junho89.kim@samsung.com>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"mj0123.lee@samsung.com" <mj0123.lee@samsung.com>,
	"seunghwan.hyun@samsung.com" <seunghwan.hyun@samsung.com>,
	"sookwan7.kim@samsung.com" <sookwan7.kim@samsung.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	"yt0928.kim@samsung.com" <yt0928.kim@samsung.com>,
	"woosung2.lee@samsung.com" <woosung2.lee@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bio: limit bio max size.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 09:28:02 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CH2PR04MB65228D54F66068DA125CCE47E7A90@CH2PR04MB6522.namprd04.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: CACVXFVMb0eE5-yo2k3KvnJjKN+aDLzOuT9rKQ7LY5-4WTgM3jw@mail.gmail.com

On 2021/01/13 18:19, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 12:09 PM Changheun Lee <nanich.lee@samsung.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021/01/12 21:14, Changheun Lee wrote:
>>>>> On 2021/01/12 17:52, Changheun Lee wrote:
>>>>>> From: "Changheun Lee" <nanich.lee@samsung.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> bio size can grow up to 4GB when muli-page bvec is enabled.
>>>>>> but sometimes it would lead to inefficient behaviors.
>>>>>> in case of large chunk direct I/O, - 64MB chunk read in user space -
>>>>>> all pages for 64MB would be merged to a bio structure if memory address is
>>>>>> continued phsycally. it makes some delay to submit until merge complete.
>>>>>> bio max size should be limited as a proper size.
>>>>>
>>>>> But merging physically contiguous pages into the same bvec + later automatic bio
>>>>> split on submit should give you better throughput for large IOs compared to
>>>>> having to issue a bio chain of smaller BIOs that are arbitrarily sized and will
>>>>> likely need splitting anyway (because of DMA boundaries etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a specific case where you see higher performance with this patch
>>>>> applied ? On Intel, BIO_MAX_SIZE would be 1MB... That is arbitrary and too small
>>>>> considering that many hardware can execute larger IOs than that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When I tested 32MB chunk read with O_DIRECT in android, all pages of 32MB
>>>> is merged into a bio structure.
>>>> And elapsed time to merge complete was about 2ms.
>>>> It means first bio-submit is after 2ms.
>>>> If bio size is limited with 1MB with this patch, first bio-submit is about
>>>> 100us by bio_full operation.
>>>
>>> bio_submit() will split the large BIO case into multiple requests while the
>>> small BIO case will likely result one or two requests only. That likely explain
>>> the time difference here. However, for the large case, the 2ms will issue ALL
>>> requests needed for processing the entire 32MB user IO while the 1MB bio case
>>> will need 32 different bio_submit() calls. So what is the actual total latency
>>> difference for the entire 32MB user IO ? That is I think what needs to be
>>> compared here.
>>>
>>> Also, what is your device max_sectors_kb and max queue depth ?
>>>
>>
>> 32MB total latency is about 19ms including merge time without this patch.
>> But with this patch, total latency is about 17ms including merge time too.
> 
> 19ms looks too big just for preparing one 32MB sized bio, which isn't
> supposed to
> take so long.  Can you investigate where the 19ms is taken just for
> preparing one
> 32MB sized bio?

Changheun mentioned that the device side IO latency is 16.7ms out of the 19ms
total. So the BIO handling, submission+completion takes about 2.3ms, and
Changheun points above to 2ms for the submission part.

> 
> It might be iov_iter_get_pages() for handling page fault. If yes, one suggestion
> is to enable THP(Transparent HugePage Support) in your application.

But if that was due to page faults, the same large-ish time would be taken for
the preparing the size-limited BIOs too, no ? No matter how the BIOs are diced,
all 32MB of pages of the user IO are referenced...

> 
> 


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-13  9:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20210112084819epcas1p2389fe5fd665e4ff7b41ad92344547294@epcas1p2.samsung.com>
2021-01-12  8:33 ` [PATCH] bio: limit bio max size Changheun Lee
2021-01-12  9:16   ` Damien Le Moal
     [not found]     ` <CGME20210112121356epcas1p124baa93f10eb3400539ba4db27c18955@epcas1p1.samsung.com>
2021-01-12 11:58       ` Changheun Lee
2021-01-13  1:16         ` Damien Le Moal
     [not found]           ` <CGME20210113040146epcas1p230596c7c3760471dca442d1f7ce4dc55@epcas1p2.samsung.com>
2021-01-13  3:46             ` Changheun Lee
2021-01-13  5:53               ` Damien Le Moal
     [not found]                 ` <CGME20210113065444epcas1p4b8ee3edb314a06b1a9f92fd0e38ca856@epcas1p4.samsung.com>
2021-01-13  6:39                   ` Changheun Lee
2021-01-13  7:12                     ` Damien Le Moal
2021-01-13  9:19               ` Ming Lei
2021-01-13  9:28                 ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2021-01-13 10:24                   ` Ming Lei
2021-01-13 11:16                     ` Damien Le Moal
2021-01-13 11:47                       ` Ming Lei
2021-01-13 12:02                         ` Damien Le Moal
2021-01-14  3:52                           ` Ming Lei
2021-01-14  4:00                             ` Damien Le Moal
     [not found]                               ` <CGME20210114045019epcas1p16d4f5f258c2a3b290540ac640745764d@epcas1p1.samsung.com>
2021-01-14  4:35                                 ` Changheun Lee
2021-01-17 12:47   ` [bio] 70c9aa94e8: WARNING:at_block/bio.c:#bio_iov_iter_get_pages kernel test robot

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=CH2PR04MB65228D54F66068DA125CCE47E7A90@CH2PR04MB6522.namprd04.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=jisoo2146.oh@samsung.com \
    --cc=junho89.kim@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mj0123.lee@samsung.com \
    --cc=nanich.lee@samsung.com \
    --cc=seunghwan.hyun@samsung.com \
    --cc=sookwan7.kim@samsung.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
    --cc=woosung2.lee@samsung.com \
    --cc=yt0928.kim@samsung.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).