From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
dm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] blk-mq: insert request not through ->queue_rq into sw/scheduler queue
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:20:22 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818152022.GB6842@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92162ee6-0fa0-dafd-69b1-af285ee61044@kernel.dk>
On Tue, Aug 18 2020 at 10:50am -0400,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
> On 8/18/20 2:07 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > c616cbee97ae ("blk-mq: punt failed direct issue to dispatch list") supposed
> > to add request which has been through ->queue_rq() to the hw queue dispatch
> > list, however it adds request running out of budget or driver tag to hw queue
> > too. This way basically bypasses request merge, and causes too many request
> > dispatched to LLD, and system% is unnecessary increased.
> >
> > Fixes this issue by adding request not through ->queue_rq into sw/scheduler
> > queue, and this way is safe because no ->queue_rq is called on this request
> > yet.
> >
> > High %system can be observed on Azure storvsc device, and even soft lock
> > is observed. This patch reduces %system during heavy sequential IO,
> > meantime decreases soft lockup risk.
>
> Applied, thanks Ming.
Hmm, strikes me as strange that this is occurring given the direct
insertion into blk-mq queue (bypassing scheduler) is meant to avoid 2
layers of IO merging when dm-mulipath is stacked on blk-mq path(s). The
dm-mpath IO scheduler does all merging and underlying paths' blk-mq
request_queues are meant to just dispatch the top-level's requests.
So this change concerns me. Feels like this design has broken down.
Could be that some other entry point was added for the
__blk_mq_try_issue_directly() code? And it needs to be untangled away
from the dm-multipath use-case?
Apologies for not responding to this patch until now.
Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-18 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-18 9:07 [PATCH RESEND] blk-mq: insert request not through ->queue_rq into sw/scheduler queue Ming Lei
2020-08-18 14:50 ` Jens Axboe
2020-08-18 15:20 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2020-08-18 23:52 ` Ming Lei
2020-08-19 0:20 ` 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=20200818152022.GB6842@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).