From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] nvme-tcp: per-controller I/O workqueues
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2024 09:10:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240705071022.GA13302@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9de5d83c-4b05-4f69-8ab4-b4aa65e5ec62@suse.de>
Btw, I don't think brd is what we should optimize for. brd does
synchronous I/O from ->submit_bio which makes it very non-typical.
Trying to get this as good as possible for QD=1 might be fine,
but once we have deeper queue depth and/or bigger I/O size it will
use a lot more time in the submission context (aka the workqueues here)
than a real device.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-05 7:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-03 13:50 [PATCH 0/4] nvme-tcp: improve scalability Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 13:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] nvme-tcp: per-controller I/O workqueues Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 14:11 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 14:46 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 15:16 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 17:07 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-03 19:14 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 19:17 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-03 19:41 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-04 7:36 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-05 7:10 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-07-05 8:11 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-05 8:16 ` Jens Axboe
2024-07-04 5:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-03 13:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] nvme-tcp: align I/O cpu with blk-mq mapping Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 14:19 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 14:53 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 15:03 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 15:40 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 19:38 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 19:47 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-04 6:43 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-04 9:07 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-04 14:03 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-04 5:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-04 9:13 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 13:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] workqueue: introduce helper workqueue_unbound_affinity_scope() Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 17:31 ` Tejun Heo
2024-07-04 6:04 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 13:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] nvme-tcp: switch to 'cpu' affinity scope for unbound workqueues Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 14:22 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 15:01 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-03 15:09 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-03 15:50 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-04 9:11 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-04 15:54 ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-07-05 11:48 ` Sagi Grimberg
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=20240705071022.GA13302@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hare@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=tj@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.