From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>,
Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>, Ed Tsai <ed.tsai@mediatek.com>,
ming.lei@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Improve shared tag set performance
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:44:08 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZTXsCGhGMk5w6qyi@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c768b829-8c86-4574-a1ec-fcc0bf60e270@acm.org>
On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 09:13:38AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/20/23 18:31, Ming Lei wrote:
> > If two LUNs are attached to same host, one is slow, and another is fast,
> > and the slow LUN can slow down the fast LUN easily without this fairness
> > algorithm.
> >
> > Your motivation is that "One of these logical units (WLUN) is used
> > to submit control commands, e.g. START STOP UNIT. If any request is
> > submitted to the WLUN, the queue depth is reduced from 31 to 15 or
> > lower for data LUNs." I guess one simple fix is to not account queues
> > of this non-IO LUN as active queues?
>
> Hi Ming,
>
> For fast storage devices (e.g. UFS) any time spent in an algorithm for
> fair sharing will reduce IOPS. If there are big differences in the
> request processing latency between different request queues then fair
> sharing is beneficial. Whether or not the fair sharing algorithm is
> improved, how about making it easy to disable fair sharing, e.g. with
> something like the untested patch below? I think that will work better
> than ignoring fair sharing per LUN. UFS devices support multiple logical
> units and with the current fair sharing approach it takes long until
> tags are taken away from an inactive LUN (request queue timeout).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.h b/block/blk-mq.h
> index f75a9ecfebde..b06b161d06de 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.h
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.h
> @@ -416,7 +416,8 @@ static inline bool hctx_may_queue(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx
> *hctx,
> {
> unsigned int depth, users;
>
> - if (!hctx || !(hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_TAG_QUEUE_SHARED))
> + if (!hctx || !(hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_TAG_QUEUE_SHARED) ||
> + hctx->queue->disable_fair_sharing)
Maybe you can propagate this flag into hctx->flags, then
hctx->queue->disable_fair_sharing can be avoided in fast path.
> return true;
>
> /*
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index eef450f25982..63b04cf65887 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -523,6 +523,7 @@ struct request_queue {
> struct mutex debugfs_mutex;
>
> bool mq_sysfs_init_done;
> + bool disable_fair_sharing;
You also need to bypass blk_mq_tag_busy() & blk_mq_tag_idle()
in case of disable_fair_sharing which should only be set for
non-IO queues, such as UFS WLUN, and maybe nvme connection queues.
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 3:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-18 18:00 [PATCH] block: Improve shared tag set performance Bart Van Assche
2023-10-20 4:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-10-20 16:17 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-20 16:25 ` Keith Busch
2023-10-20 16:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-20 17:09 ` Keith Busch
2023-10-20 17:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-21 1:31 ` Ming Lei
2023-10-21 16:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-23 3:44 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2023-10-20 19:11 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-21 7:32 ` Yu Kuai
2023-10-21 16:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-10-23 1:11 ` Yu Kuai
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-01-02 17:39 Bart Van Assche
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=ZTXsCGhGMk5w6qyi@fedora \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=ed.tsai@mediatek.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.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