From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Felipe Franciosi <felipe@nutanix.com>
Cc: "lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] NVMe Performance: Userspace vs Kernel
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 14:47:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190215214714.GA11307@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DAB8A2DA-37D3-4CBE-8AD7-356E3CE8B0D3@nutanix.com>
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 09:19:02PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote:
> Over the last year or two, I have done extensive experimentation comparing applications using libaio to those using SDPK.
Try the io_uring interface instead. Its queued up in the linux-block
for-next tree.
> For hypervisors, where storage devices can be exclusively accessed with userspace drivers (given the device can be dedicated to a single process), using SPDK has proven to be significantly faster and more efficient.
It doesn't work so well for file based or multi-device backing
storage. But if you are sequestering an entire controller over to a VM,
direct-assign/device-passthrough is usually also an option and that
ought to be even faster.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch)
Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC] NVMe Performance: Userspace vs Kernel
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 14:47:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190215214714.GA11307@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DAB8A2DA-37D3-4CBE-8AD7-356E3CE8B0D3@nutanix.com>
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019@09:19:02PM +0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote:
> Over the last year or two, I have done extensive experimentation comparing applications using libaio to those using SDPK.
Try the io_uring interface instead. Its queued up in the linux-block
for-next tree.
> For hypervisors, where storage devices can be exclusively accessed with userspace drivers (given the device can be dedicated to a single process), using SPDK has proven to be significantly faster and more efficient.
It doesn't work so well for file based or multi-device backing
storage. But if you are sequestering an entire controller over to a VM,
direct-assign/device-passthrough is usually also an option and that
ought to be even faster.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-15 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-15 21:19 [LSF/MM TOPIC] NVMe Performance: Userspace vs Kernel Felipe Franciosi
2019-02-15 21:19 ` Felipe Franciosi
2019-02-15 21:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-02-15 21:41 ` Bart Van Assche
[not found] ` <11A6C7D0-A26D-410F-8EE3-9AF524DF2050@nutanix.com>
2019-02-16 1:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-02-16 1:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-02-16 1:54 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-16 1:54 ` Jens Axboe
2019-02-15 21:47 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2019-02-15 21:47 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-15 22:14 ` Felipe Franciosi
2019-02-15 22:14 ` Felipe Franciosi
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=20190215214714.GA11307@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=felipe@nutanix.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.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.