From: Kaitao Cheng <kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: add direct dispatch support for mq-deadline
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 20:49:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <95c88c33-0184-4258-ac02-8eb42f346b36@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <307b05d7-16dd-493a-a10a-d5ac50ec219b@acm.org>
在 2026/10/17 22:19, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> On 10/17/26 3:54 AM, Kaitao Cheng wrote:
>> Bandwidth in MiB/s:
>>
>> Workload none mq-deadline my-patch
>> jobs1-4k 1209 1047 1174
>> jobs10-4k 2458 946 2349
>> jobs1-32k 2568 2565 2562
>
> Can I conclude from the above numbers that "none" performs
> better than "mq-deadline" and hence that it's better not to use
> and I/O scheduler rather than to complicate the mq-deadline source
> code?
>
> I have removed the linux-doc and linux-kernel mailing lists from the
> Cc-list. Block layer patches should be posted on the linux-block mailing
> list only.
>
I ran additional tests on both a SATA SSD and a SAS HDD. The results are
as follows:
SATA SSD none mq-deadline my-patch
jobs1-4k 294 295 295
jobs10-4k 133 400 401
jobs1-32k 470 470 470
SAS HDD none mq-deadline my-patch
jobs1-4k 218 218 218
jobs10-4k 26.6 26.9 27.2
jobs1-32k 225 224 224
The SAS HDD results show no clear performance differences. On the SATA SSD,
however, mq-deadline outperforms none, and my patch preserves mq-deadline's
performance. Together with the earlier NVMe SSD results, these results
suggest that the patch combines the benefits of both none and mq-deadline.
I also found in the NVMe SSD tests that disabling the direct dispatch paths
used with the none scheduler causes its performance to drop to the same
level as mq-deadline.
--
Thanks
Kaitao Cheng
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-20 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-17 10:54 [PATCH] blk-mq: add direct dispatch support for mq-deadline Kaitao Cheng
2026-10-17 14:19 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-10-18 9:09 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-10-20 12:49 ` Kaitao Cheng [this message]
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=95c88c33-0184-4258-ac02-8eb42f346b36@linux.dev \
--to=kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.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.