From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC] blk-mq priority based hctx selection
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 18:13:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180116011345.GB32369@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180115163952.GB26120@cmpxchg.org>
For the storage track, I would like to propose a topic for differentiated
blk-mq hardware contexts. Today, blk-mq considers all hardware contexts
equal, and are selected based on the software's CPU context. There are
use cases that benefit from having hardware context selection criteria
beyond which CPU a process happens to be running on.
One example is exlusive polling for the latency sensitive use cases.
Mixing polled and non-polled requests into the same context loses part of
the benefit when interrupts unnecessarilly occur, and coalescing tricks
to mitigate this have undesirable side effects during times when
HIPRI commands are not issued.
Another example is for hardware priority queues, where not all command
queues the hardware provides may be equal to another. Many newer storage
controllers provide such queues with different QoS guarantees, and Linux
currently does not make use of this feature.
The talk would like to discuss potential new blk-mq APIs needed for
a block driver to register its different priority queues, changes to
blk-mq hwctx selection, and implications for low level drivers that
utilize IRQ affinity to set up current mappings.
Thanks,
Keith
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-15 16:39 LSF/MM 2018: Call for Proposals Johannes Weiner
2018-01-16 1:13 ` Keith Busch [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=20180116011345.GB32369@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox