From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
"longli@linuxonhyperv.com" <longli@linuxonhyperv.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/3] nvme: complete request in work queue on CPU with flooded interrupts
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2019 00:13:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CY4PR21MB0741292F0C535156DAC690D7CEA70@CY4PR21MB0741.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7fbdf43a-9499-8fb3-f6ec-5f1027b9fb65@grimberg.me>
>>>Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvme: complete request in work queue on CPU
>>>with flooded interrupts
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sagi,
>>>>
>>>> Here are the test results.
>>>>
>>>> Benchmark command:
>>>> fio --bs=4k --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=64
>>>> --
>>>filename=/dev/nvme0n1:/dev/nvme1n1:/dev/nvme2n1:/dev/nvme3n1:/d
>>>ev/nv
>>>>
>>>me4n1:/dev/nvme5n1:/dev/nvme6n1:/dev/nvme7n1:/dev/nvme8n1:/dev
>>>/nvme9n1
>>>> --direct=1 --runtime=90 --numjobs=80 --rw=randread --name=test
>>>> --group_reporting --gtod_reduce=1
>>>>
>>>> With your patch: 1720k IOPS
>>>> With threaded interrupts: 1320k IOPS
>>>> With just interrupts: 3720k IOPS
>>>>
>>>> Interrupts are the fastest but we need to find a way to throttle it.
>>>
>>>This is the workload that generates the flood?
>>>If so I did not expect that this would be the perf difference..
>>>
>>>If completions keep pounding on the cpu, I would expect irqpoll to simply
>>>keep running forever and poll the cqs. There is no fundamental reason why
>>>polling would be faster in an interrupt, what matters could be:
>>>1. we reschedule more than we need to
>>>2. we don't reap enough completions in every poll round, which will trigger
>>>rearming the interrupt and then when it fires reschedule another softirq...
>>>
Yes I think it's the rescheduling that takes some. With the patch there are lots of ksoftirqd activities. (compared to nearly none without the patch)
A 90 seconds FIO run shows a big difference of context switches on all CPUs:
With patch: 5755849
Without patch: 1462931
>>>Maybe we need to take care of some irq_poll optimizations?
>>>
>>>Does this (untested) patch make any difference?
>>>--
>>>diff --git a/lib/irq_poll.c b/lib/irq_poll.c index 2f17b488d58e..0e94183eba15
>>>100644
>>>--- a/lib/irq_poll.c
>>>+++ b/lib/irq_poll.c
>>>@@ -12,7 +12,8 @@
>>> #include <linux/irq_poll.h>
>>> #include <linux/delay.h>
>>>
>>>-static unsigned int irq_poll_budget __read_mostly = 256;
>>>+static unsigned int irq_poll_budget __read_mostly = 3000; unsigned int
>>>+__read_mostly irqpoll_budget_usecs = 2000;
>>>
>>> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct list_head, blk_cpu_iopoll);
>>>
>>>@@ -77,32 +78,26 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(irq_poll_complete);
>>>
>>> static void __latent_entropy irq_poll_softirq(struct softirq_action *h)
>>> {
>>>- struct list_head *list = this_cpu_ptr(&blk_cpu_iopoll);
>>>- int rearm = 0, budget = irq_poll_budget;
>>>- unsigned long start_time = jiffies;
>>>+ struct list_head *irqpoll_list = this_cpu_ptr(&blk_cpu_iopoll);
>>>+ unsigned int budget = irq_poll_budget;
>>>+ unsigned long time_limit =
>>>+ jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies(irqpoll_budget_usecs);
>>>+ LIST_HEAD(list);
>>>
>>> local_irq_disable();
>>>+ list_splice_init(irqpoll_list, &list);
>>>+ local_irq_enable();
>>>
>>>- while (!list_empty(list)) {
>>>+ while (!list_empty(&list)) {
>>> struct irq_poll *iop;
>>> int work, weight;
>>>
>>>- /*
>>>- * If softirq window is exhausted then punt.
>>>- */
>>>- if (budget <= 0 || time_after(jiffies, start_time)) {
>>>- rearm = 1;
>>>- break;
>>>- }
>>>-
>>>- local_irq_enable();
>>>-
>>> /* Even though interrupts have been re-enabled, this
>>> * access is safe because interrupts can only add new
>>> * entries to the tail of this list, and only ->poll()
>>> * calls can remove this head entry from the list.
>>> */
>>>- iop = list_entry(list->next, struct irq_poll, list);
>>>+ iop = list_first_entry(&list, struct irq_poll, list);
>>>
>>> weight = iop->weight;
>>> work = 0;
>>>@@ -111,8 +106,6 @@ static void __latent_entropy irq_poll_softirq(struct
>>>softirq_action *h)
>>>
>>> budget -= work;
>>>
>>>- local_irq_disable();
>>>-
>>> /*
>>> * Drivers must not modify the iopoll state, if they
>>> * consume their assigned weight (or more, some drivers can't @@
>>>-125,11 +118,21 @@ static void __latent_entropy irq_poll_softirq(struct
>>>softirq_action *h)
>>> if (test_bit(IRQ_POLL_F_DISABLE, &iop->state))
>>> __irq_poll_complete(iop);
>>> else
>>>- list_move_tail(&iop->list, list);
>>>+ list_move_tail(&iop->list, &list);
>>> }
>>>+
>>>+ /*
>>>+ * If softirq window is exhausted then punt.
>>>+ */
>>>+ if (budget <= 0 || time_after_eq(jiffies, time_limit))
>>>+ break;
>>> }
>>>
>>>- if (rearm)
>>>+ local_irq_disable();
>>>+
>>>+ list_splice_tail_init(irqpoll_list, &list);
>>>+ list_splice(&list, irqpoll_list);
>>>+ if (!list_empty(irqpoll_list))
>>> __raise_softirq_irqoff(IRQ_POLL_SOFTIRQ);
>>>
>>> local_irq_enable();
>>>--
It's got slightly better IOPS. With this 2nd patch, the number of context switches is at 5445863 (~5% improvement over the 1st patch).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-24 0:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-20 6:14 [PATCH 0/3] fix interrupt swamp in NVMe longli
2019-08-20 6:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched: define a function to report the number of context switches on a CPU longli
2019-08-20 9:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-21 8:20 ` Long Li
2019-08-21 10:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-20 9:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-20 6:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched: export idle_cpu() longli
2019-08-20 6:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme: complete request in work queue on CPU with flooded interrupts longli
2019-08-20 9:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-21 8:37 ` Long Li
2019-08-21 10:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-08-20 17:33 ` Sagi Grimberg
2019-08-21 8:39 ` Long Li
2019-08-21 17:36 ` Long Li
2019-08-21 21:54 ` Sagi Grimberg
2019-08-24 0:13 ` Long Li [this message]
2019-08-23 3:21 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-24 0:27 ` Long Li
2019-08-24 12:55 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-20 8:25 ` [PATCH 0/3] fix interrupt swamp in NVMe Ming Lei
2019-08-20 8:59 ` John Garry
2019-08-20 15:05 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-21 7:47 ` Long Li
2019-08-21 9:44 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-21 10:03 ` John Garry
2019-08-21 16:27 ` Long Li
2019-08-22 1:33 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-22 2:00 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-22 2:23 ` Ming Lei
2019-08-22 9:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=CY4PR21MB0741292F0C535156DAC690D7CEA70@CY4PR21MB0741.namprd21.prod.outlook.com \
--to=longli@microsoft.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=longli@linuxonhyperv.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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).