All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>, dm-devel@redhat.com
Cc: shivakrishna.merla@netapp.com, jmoyer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/4] dm: delay running the queue slightly during request completion
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:51:20 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54ECAC08.7040603@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424796250-38553-5-git-send-email-snitzer@redhat.com>

On 02/24/2015 08:44 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On really fast storage it can be beneficial to delay running the
> request_queue to allow the elevator more opportunity to merge requests.
>
> Otherwise, it has been observed that requests are being sent to
> q->request_fn much quicker than is ideal on IOPS-bound backends.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
> ---
>   drivers/md/dm.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm.c b/drivers/md/dm.c
> index fc92899..92091e0 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/dm.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm.c
> @@ -1034,7 +1034,7 @@ static void rq_completed(struct mapped_device *md, int rw, bool run_queue)
>   	 * queue lock again.
>   	 */
>   	if (run_queue)
> -		blk_run_queue_async(md->queue);
> +		blk_delay_queue(md->queue, HZ / 10);

This looks dangerous... How will this impact sync IO? Heuristics like 
this will always come back and bite you in the ass.

A slightly more friendly heuristic might be to delay running the queue, 
if you still have pending IO. That would give you a more sawtooth like 
queue depth management, so it would potentially slow down a bit, but the 
upside would be more efficient merging since it would allow some 
requests so sit a little bit before being dispatched.

-- 
Jens Axboe

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-24 16:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-24 16:44 [PATCH 0/4] dm: simplify request-based DM a bit and an RFC-like perf tweak Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 16:44 ` [PATCH 1/4] dm: remove unnecessary wrapper around blk_lld_busy Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 16:44 ` [PATCH 2/4] dm: remove request-based DM queue's lld_busy_fn hook Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 16:44 ` [PATCH 3/4] dm: remove request-based logic from make_request_fn wrapper Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 16:44 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] dm: delay running the queue slightly during request completion Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 16:51   ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2015-02-24 17:22     ` [RFC PATCH 4/4 v2] " Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 17:52       ` Jens Axboe
2015-02-24 18:12         ` Mike Snitzer
2015-02-24 18:16           ` Jens Axboe
2015-02-24 18:32             ` Mike Snitzer
2015-02-25  0:56               ` awful request merge results while simulating high IOPS multipath Mike Snitzer
2015-02-25  4:14                 ` Keith Busch
2015-02-25 15:11                   ` Jens Axboe
2015-02-25 18:17                     ` Busch, Keith
2015-02-25 22:10                       ` Mike Snitzer
2015-02-25 23:57                         ` Keith Busch
2015-02-26  0:11                           ` Mike Snitzer
2015-02-26  0:28                             ` Keith Busch
2015-02-25  4:38                 ` FIXED! [was: awful request merge results while simulating high IOPS] multipath Mike Snitzer
2015-02-25  4:41                   ` Mike Snitzer

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=54ECAC08.7040603@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=shivakrishna.merla@netapp.com \
    --cc=snitzer@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.