From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, Linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Two blk-mq related topics
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 11:08:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mqdzi4vlkv7.fsf@linux-x5ow.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc833da8-f9de-d577-e1d3-c46d8c061d35@kernel.dk> (Jens Axboe's message of "Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:00:11 -0700")
[+Cc Mel]
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
> On 1/29/18 1:56 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 23:46 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> [...]
>>> 2. When to enable SCSI_MQ at default again?
>>=20
>> I'm not sure there's much to discuss ... I think the basic answer is as
>> soon as Christoph wants to try it again.
>
> FWIW, internally I've been running various IO intensive workloads on
> what is essentially 4.12 upstream with scsi-mq the default (with
> mq-deadline as the scheduler) and comparing IO workloads with a
> previous 4.6 kernel (without scsi-mq), and things are looking
> great.
>
> We're never going to iron out the last kinks with it being off
> by default, I think we should attempt to flip the switch again
> for 4.16.
The 4.12 sounds interesting. I remember Mel ran some test with 4.12 as
we where considering to flip the config option for SLES and it showed
several road blocks.
I'm not sure whether he re-evaluated 4.13/4.14 on his grid though.
But I'm definitively interested in this discussion and can even possibly
share some benchmark results we did in our FC Lab.
Byte,
Johannes
--=20
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg
GF: Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG N=C3=BCrnberg)
Key fingerprint =3D EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jthumshirn@suse.de (Johannes Thumshirn)
Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Two blk-mq related topics
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 11:08:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mqdzi4vlkv7.fsf@linux-x5ow.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc833da8-f9de-d577-e1d3-c46d8c061d35@kernel.dk> (Jens Axboe's message of "Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:00:11 -0700")
[+Cc Mel]
Jens Axboe <axboe at kernel.dk> writes:
> On 1/29/18 1:56 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Mon, 2018-01-29@23:46 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> [...]
>>> 2. When to enable SCSI_MQ at default again?
>>
>> I'm not sure there's much to discuss ... I think the basic answer is as
>> soon as Christoph wants to try it again.
>
> FWIW, internally I've been running various IO intensive workloads on
> what is essentially 4.12 upstream with scsi-mq the default (with
> mq-deadline as the scheduler) and comparing IO workloads with a
> previous 4.6 kernel (without scsi-mq), and things are looking
> great.
>
> We're never going to iron out the last kinks with it being off
> by default, I think we should attempt to flip the switch again
> for 4.16.
The 4.12 sounds interesting. I remember Mel ran some test with 4.12 as
we where considering to flip the config option for SLES and it showed
several road blocks.
I'm not sure whether he re-evaluated 4.13/4.14 on his grid though.
But I'm definitively interested in this discussion and can even possibly
share some benchmark results we did in our FC Lab.
Byte,
Johannes
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn at suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N?rnberg
GF: Felix Imend?rffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG N?rnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org, Linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Two blk-mq related topics
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 11:08:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mqdzi4vlkv7.fsf@linux-x5ow.site> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc833da8-f9de-d577-e1d3-c46d8c061d35@kernel.dk> (Jens Axboe's message of "Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:00:11 -0700")
[+Cc Mel]
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
> On 1/29/18 1:56 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Mon, 2018-01-29 at 23:46 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> [...]
>>> 2. When to enable SCSI_MQ at default again?
>>
>> I'm not sure there's much to discuss ... I think the basic answer is as
>> soon as Christoph wants to try it again.
>
> FWIW, internally I've been running various IO intensive workloads on
> what is essentially 4.12 upstream with scsi-mq the default (with
> mq-deadline as the scheduler) and comparing IO workloads with a
> previous 4.6 kernel (without scsi-mq), and things are looking
> great.
>
> We're never going to iron out the last kinks with it being off
> by default, I think we should attempt to flip the switch again
> for 4.16.
The 4.12 sounds interesting. I remember Mel ran some test with 4.12 as
we where considering to flip the config option for SLES and it showed
several road blocks.
I'm not sure whether he re-evaluated 4.13/4.14 on his grid though.
But I'm definitively interested in this discussion and can even possibly
share some benchmark results we did in our FC Lab.
Byte,
Johannes
--
Johannes Thumshirn Storage
jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-30 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-29 15:46 [LSF/MM TOPIC] Two blk-mq related topics Ming Lei
2018-01-29 15:46 ` Ming Lei
2018-01-29 20:40 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-01-29 20:40 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-01-30 1:27 ` [Lsf-pc] " Ming Lei
2018-01-30 1:27 ` Ming Lei
2018-01-30 1:27 ` Ming Lei
2018-01-29 20:56 ` James Bottomley
2018-01-29 20:56 ` James Bottomley
2018-01-29 21:00 ` Jens Axboe
2018-01-29 21:00 ` Jens Axboe
2018-01-29 23:46 ` James Bottomley
2018-01-29 23:46 ` James Bottomley
2018-01-30 1:47 ` Jens Axboe
2018-01-30 1:47 ` Jens Axboe
2018-01-30 10:08 ` Johannes Thumshirn [this message]
2018-01-30 10:08 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-01-30 10:08 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2018-01-30 10:50 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-30 10:50 ` Mel Gorman
2018-01-30 1:24 ` Ming Lei
2018-01-30 1:24 ` Ming Lei
2018-01-30 8:33 ` [Lsf-pc] " Martin Steigerwald
2018-01-30 8:33 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-01-30 8:33 ` Martin Steigerwald
2018-01-30 10:33 ` John Garry
2018-01-30 10:33 ` John Garry
2018-01-30 10:33 ` John Garry
2018-02-07 10:55 ` John Garry
2018-02-07 10:55 ` John Garry
2018-02-07 10:55 ` John Garry
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=mqdzi4vlkv7.fsf@linux-x5ow.site \
--to=jthumshirn@suse.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=Linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.com \
--cc=ming.lei@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.