From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>
Cc: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"hare@suse.com" <hare@suse.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Call .initialize_rq_fn() also for filesystem requests
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 11:01:50 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170830030145.GD4897@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1504037722.2653.47.camel@wdc.com>
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 08:15:23PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-08-29 at 19:16 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Hi Bart,
> >
> > Did you see perf regression on SRP with smaller jobs after applying
> > my patchset V3?
> >
> > I just run the test with 16 jobs(the system has 16 CPU cores) instead of 64,
> > looks not see perf regression on SRP about v4.13-rc6+blk-next(2nd column) VS.
> > v4.13-rc6+blk-next+patch V3(3rd column):
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------
> > IOPS(K) | NONE | NONE
> > ---------------------------------------
> > read | 475.83 | 485.88
> > ---------------------------------------
> > randread | 142.86 | 141.96
> > ---------------------------------------
> > write | 483.9 | 492.39
> > ---------------------------------------
> > randwrite | 124.83 | 124.53
> > ---------------------------------------
> > [ ... ]
> > ---------------------------------------
> > LAT(us) | NONE | NONE
> > ---------------------------------------
> > read | 2.15 | 2.11
> > ---------------------------------------
> > randread | 7.17 | 7.21
> > ---------------------------------------
> > write | 2.11 | 2.08
> > ---------------------------------------
> > randwrite | 8.2 | 8.22
> > ---------------------------------------
> > [ ... ]
>
> Hello Ming,
>
> Although I would prefer to see measurement data against an SRP target system
> that supports a higher workload (>1M IOPS) and
Hi Bart,
For so higher workload, I guess it often requires to increase
.cmd_per_lun.
> also for a high-end NVMe drive,
My patch won't affect NVMe drive since NVMe driver doesn't become busy
usually.
> I think the above data is sufficient to show that the performance impact of
> your patch series is most likely small enough even for high-end SCSI initiator
> drivers.
OK.
--
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-30 3:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-25 19:00 [PATCH] block: Call .initialize_rq_fn() also for filesystem requests Bart Van Assche
2017-08-28 8:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-08-28 18:31 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-08-29 11:16 ` Ming Lei
2017-08-29 20:15 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-08-30 3:01 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2017-08-29 13:12 ` hch
2017-08-29 20:57 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-08-29 21:24 ` Jens Axboe
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=20170830030145.GD4897@ming.t460p \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.