From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: ZhangHui <zhanghui31@xiaomi.com>,
bvanassche@acm.org, ming.lei@redhat.com, dlemoal@kernel.org
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] block: move non sync requests complete flow to softirq
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:46:25 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <38a71a3f-b505-48a3-bbaf-2bdf60dfcd9d@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240907024901.405881-1-zhanghui31@xiaomi.com>
On 9/6/24 8:49 PM, ZhangHui wrote:
> From: zhanghui <zhanghui31@xiaomi.com>
>
> Currently, for a controller that supports multiple queues, like UFS4.0,
> the mq_ops->complete is executed in the interrupt top-half. Therefore,
> the file system's end io is executed during the request completion process,
> such as f2fs_write_end_io on smartphone.
>
> However, we found that the execution time of the file system end io
> is strongly related to the size of the bio and the processing speed
> of the CPU. Because the file system's end io will traverse every page
> in bio, this is a very time-consuming operation.
>
> We measured that the 80M bio write operation on the little CPU will
> cause the execution time of the top-half to be greater than 100ms,
> which will undoubtedly affect interrupt response latency.
>
> Let's fix this issue by moving non sync requests completion to softirq
> context, and keeping sync requests completion in the IRQ top-half context.
You keep ignoring the feedback, and hence I too shall be ignoring this
patch going forward then.
The key issue here is that the completion takes so long, and adding a
heuristic that equates not-sync with latency-not-important is pretty
bogus and not a good way to attempt to work around it.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-07 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-07 2:49 [PATCH v6] block: move non sync requests complete flow to softirq ZhangHui
2024-09-07 13:46 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2024-09-09 2:17 ` [External Mail]Re: " 章辉
2024-09-09 13:22 ` 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=38a71a3f-b505-48a3-bbaf-2bdf60dfcd9d@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=zhanghui31@xiaomi.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).