All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Chirantan Ekbote <chirantan@chromium.org>
Cc: "virtio-fs@redhat.com" <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
	"misono.tomohiro@fujitsu.com" <misono.tomohiro@fujitsu.com>,
	"masayoshi.mizuma@fujitsu.com" <masayoshi.mizuma@fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] xfstest results for virtio-fs on aarch64
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 15:44:43 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191016194443.GA18180@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJFHJrrtVHJQr6tCRYJmL-roVo_dMekOLQPsb4ryc96Bf6hAJA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 04:36:33AM +0900, Chirantan Ekbote wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:10 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 11:58:46PM +0900, Chirantan Ekbote wrote:
> > >
> > > As for the performance numbers, I don't have my test device with me
> > > but if I remember correctly the blogbench scores almost doubled when
> > > going from one queue to two queues.
> >
> > If I understand the code correctly each virtqueue is processed by a
> > worker and the number of virtqueues is the vcpu count.  This means that
> > requests are processed in a blocking fashion and the disk is unlikely to
> > reach its maximum queue depth (e.g. often 64 requests).
> >
> > Going from 1 virtqueue to 2 virtqueues will improve performance, but
> > it's still a far cry from the maximum queue depth that the host kernel
> > and hardware supports.  This is why virtiofsd processes multiple
> > requests in parallel on a single virtqueue using a thread pool.
> 
> Hmm, maybe I'm missing something but isn't this still limited by the
> number of requests that can fit in the virtqueue?  Unlike virtio-net
> there is no separate queue for sending data back from host -> guest.
> Each request also includes a buffer for the response so once the
> virtqueue is full all other requests block in the guest until a
> request is completed and can be removed from the queue.  So even in a
> thread pool model, going from 1 virtqueue to 2 virtqueues would double
> the number of requests that can be handled in parallel.

Yes. But default queue size is big enough to pack good number of requests.
IIUC, it is 1024 on my VM. So 64 threads can do I/O on these 1024
requests.

But having multiple queue can make it even better and allow more I/O to
make progress in parallel.

We do have plans to implement another queue for notifying guest and
send notifications for things like lock has been acquired, possibly
metadata change notifications as well. 

Thanks
Vivek


  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-16 19:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-07 12:11 [Virtio-fs] xfstest results for virtio-fs on aarch64 qi.fuli
2019-10-07 14:34 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-09 16:51   ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-10  9:57     ` qi.fuli
2019-10-11  9:21       ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-11 18:45       ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-11 19:59         ` Vivek Goyal
2019-10-11 20:13           ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-11 20:36             ` Vivek Goyal
2019-10-14  9:11               ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-10-15 14:58                 ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-15 15:57                   ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-15 16:11                     ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-15 16:26                       ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-15 17:28                         ` Boeuf, Sebastien
2019-10-15 18:21                           ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-16 14:14                             ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-10-16 16:14                               ` Boeuf, Sebastien
2019-10-16 18:38                                 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-10-17  5:19                                   ` Boeuf, Sebastien
2019-11-01 22:26                                   ` Boeuf, Sebastien
2019-11-12  9:45                                     ` Stefan Hajnoczi
     [not found]                                       ` <5238b860a8d544e59c9a827fbc26418d53482ccf.camel@intel.com>
2019-11-13 11:39                                         ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-11-20 16:53                                           ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-10-16 16:11                             ` Boeuf, Sebastien
2019-10-16 18:37                               ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-10-16 14:09                   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-10-16 19:36                     ` Chirantan Ekbote
2019-10-16 19:44                       ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2019-10-17  9:23                       ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-11-06 12:13 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-11-07  8:03   ` misono.tomohiro

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=20191016194443.GA18180@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=chirantan@chromium.org \
    --cc=masayoshi.mizuma@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=misono.tomohiro@fujitsu.com \
    --cc=virtio-fs@redhat.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.