From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
"lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Improving Zoned Storage Support
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:42:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e19746ce-fdea-4372-bc26-1ee7b1a9a22d@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c6dfb4f5-10f9-461e-8743-b730a8384f95@acm.org>
On 1/17/24 5:38 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 1/17/24 10:43, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> Do we care? Maybe not, if we accept that an IO scheduler is just for
>> "slower devices". But let's not go around spouting some 200K number as
>> if it's gospel, when it depends on so many factors like IO workload,
>> system used, etc.
> I've never seen more than 200K IOPS in a single-threaded test. Since
> your tests report higher IOPS numbers, I assume that you are submitting
> I/O from multiple CPU cores at the same time.
Single core, using mq-deadline (with the poc patch, but number without
you can already find in a previous reply):
axboe@7950x ~/g/fio (master)> cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/queue/scheduler
none [mq-deadline]
axboe@7950x ~/g/fio (master)> sudo t/io_uring -p1 -d128 -b512 -s32 -c32 -F1 -B1 -R1 -X1 -n1 /dev/nvme0n1
submitter=0, tid=1957, file=/dev/nvme0n1, node=-1
polled=1, fixedbufs=1/0, register_files=1, buffered=0, QD=128
Engine=io_uring, sq_ring=128, cq_ring=128
IOPS=5.10M, BW=2.49GiB/s, IOS/call=32/31
IOPS=5.10M, BW=2.49GiB/s, IOS/call=32/32
IOPS=5.10M, BW=2.49GiB/s, IOS/call=31/31
Using non-polled IO, the number is around 4M.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-18 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-16 18:20 [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Improving Zoned Storage Support Bart Van Assche
2024-01-16 23:34 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-01-17 1:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-17 17:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-17 17:48 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 18:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-17 18:43 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 20:06 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 20:18 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-17 20:20 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 21:02 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 21:14 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 21:33 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-17 21:40 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-18 0:43 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-18 14:51 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-18 0:38 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-18 0:42 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2024-01-18 0:54 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-01-18 15:07 ` Jens Axboe
2024-01-17 8:15 ` Viacheslav Dubeyko
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=e19746ce-fdea-4372-bc26-1ee7b1a9a22d@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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