From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@broadcom.com>
Cc: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Yanhui Ma <yama@redhat.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: set default elevator as deadline in case of hctx shared tagset
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:48:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHbIfNKGXq6V6KUF@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49bb403dc1ecf8ea25eb40c0fb921c65@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 01:51:01PM +0530, Kashyap Desai wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:04:30AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> > > Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 11:25:08PM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> > > > > On 06/04/2021 04:19, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Ming,
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yanhui found that write performance is degraded a lot after
> > > > > > applying hctx shared tagset on one test machine with
> > > > > > megaraid_sas. And turns out it is caused by none scheduler which
> > > > > > becomes default elevator caused by hctx shared tagset patchset.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Given more scsi HBAs will apply hctx shared tagset, and the
> > > > > > similar performance exists for them too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So keep previous behavior by still using default mq-deadline for
> > > > > > queues which apply hctx shared tagset, just like before.
> > > > > I think that there a some SCSI HBAs which have nr_hw_queues > 1
> > > > > and don't use shared sbitmap - do you think that they want want
> > > > > this as well (without knowing it)?
>
> John - I have noted this and discussing internally.
> This patch fixing shared host tag behavior is good (and required to intact
> earlier behavior) but for <mpi3mr> which is true multi hardware queue
> interface, I will update later.
> In general most of the OS vendor recommend <mq-deadline> for rotational
> media and <none> for non-rotational media. We would like to go with this
> method in <mpi3mr> driver.
>
>
> > > > I don't know but none has been used for them since the beginning, so
> > > > not an regression of shared tagset, but this one is really.
> > >
> > > It seems fine to revert to previous behavior when host_tagset is set.
> > > I didn't check the results for this recently, but for the original
> > > shared tagset patchset [0] I had:
> > >
> > > none sched: 2132K IOPS
> > > mq-deadline sched: 2145K IOPS
>
> On my local setup also I did not see much difference.
>
> >
> > BTW, Yanhui reported that sequential write on virtio-scsi drops by
> 40~70% in
> > VM, and the virito-scsi is backed by file image on XFS over
> megaraid_sas. And
> > the disk is actually SSD, instead of HDD. It could be worse in case of
> > megaraid_sas HDD.
>
> Ming - If we have old megaraid_sas driver (without host tag set patch),
> and just toggling io-scheduler from <none> to <mq-deadline> (through
> sysfs) also gives similar performance drop. ?
The default io sched for old megraid_sas is mq-deadline, which
performs very well in Yanhui's virt workloads. And with none, IO
performance drops much with new driver(shared tags).
The disk is INTEL SSDSC2CT06.
>
> I think performance drop using <none> io scheduler, might be due to bio
> merge is missing compare to mq-deadline. It may not be linked to shared
> host tag IO path.
> Usually bio merge does not help for sequential work load if back-end is
> enterprise SSDs/NVME, but it is not always true. It is difficult to have
> all setup and workload to get benefit from one io-scheduler.
BTW, with mq-deadline & shared tags, CPU utilization is increased by ~20%
in some VM fio test
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-14 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-06 3:19 [PATCH] blk-mq: set default elevator as deadline in case of hctx shared tagset Ming Lei
2021-04-06 3:49 ` Martin K. Petersen
2021-04-06 17:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-04-06 22:25 ` John Garry
2021-04-07 0:48 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-07 8:04 ` John Garry
2021-04-07 10:14 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-14 8:21 ` Kashyap Desai
2021-04-14 10:48 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-04-08 8:36 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-08 15:57 ` Jens Axboe
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=YHbIfNKGXq6V6KUF@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=kashyap.desai@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yama@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.