From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] blk-throtl: make latency= absolute
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 06:18:49 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171113141849.GH983427@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171113112710.GG983427@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Hello, Shaohua. Just a bit of addition.
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 03:27:10AM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> What I'm trying to say is that the latency is defined as "from bio
> issue to completion", not "in-flight time on device". Whether the
> on-device latency is 50us or 500us, the host side queueing latency can
> be in orders of magnitude higher.
>
> For things like starvation protection for managerial workloads which
> work fine on rotating disks, the only thing we need to protect against
> is excessive host side queue overflowing leading to starvation of such
> workloads. IOW, we're talking about latency target in tens or lower
> hundreds of millisecs. Whether the on-device time is 50 or 500us
> doesn't matter that much.
So, the absolute latency target can express the requirements of the
workload in question - it's saying "if the IO latency stays within
this boundary, regardless of the underlying device, this workload is
gonna be happy enough". There are workloads which are this way -
e.g. it has some IOs to do and some deadline requirements (like
heartbeat period). For those workloads, it doesn't matter what the
underlying device is. It can be a rotating disk, or a slow or
lightening-fast SSD. As long as the absolute target latency is met,
the workload will be happy.
The % notation can express how much proportional hit the workload is
willing to take to share the underlying device with others - "I'm
willing to take 20% extra hit in latency so that I can be a nice
neighbor", which also makes sense to me.
The baseline + slack (the current one) is the mix of the two. IOW,
the configuration is dependent on both the workload requirements and
the performance characteristics of the underlying device - you can't
use a single value across different workloads or devices. We can
absolutely keep supporting this but I think it fits worse than the
previous two and am having a bit of hard time to come up with why we'd
want this.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-13 14:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-09 22:19 [PATCH 1/2] blk-throtl: make latency= absolute Tejun Heo
2017-11-09 22:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-throtl: add relative percentage support to latency= Tejun Heo
2017-11-14 22:06 ` Shaohua Li
2017-11-09 23:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-throtl: make latency= absolute Shaohua Li
2017-11-09 23:42 ` Tejun Heo
2017-11-10 4:27 ` Shaohua Li
2017-11-10 15:43 ` Tejun Heo
2017-11-13 4:29 ` Shaohua Li
2017-11-13 11:27 ` Tejun Heo
2017-11-13 14:18 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2017-11-13 22:08 ` Shaohua Li
2017-11-14 14:52 ` Tejun Heo
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=20171113141849.GH983427@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
/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.