From: Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Cc: dwagner@suse.de, hare@suse.de, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
gjoyce@linux.ibm.com, chaitanyak@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] nvme-cli: NIC topology aware I/O queue scaling
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 14:18:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32bcaf68-a142-4612-9967-815dd28ee2a0@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a80220a-2cba-4a4a-85c2-7c3d3ae8a20a@grimberg.me>
On 8/23/26 3:13 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>
>
> On 21/08/2026 17:43, Nilay Shroff wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This series is a rework of the earlier patchset[1]. The main
>> difference is that --nr-io-queues is now calculated in nvme-cli
>> instead of in the kernel when establishing an NVMe/TCP connection.
>>
>> This rework is based on the feedback received[2] from the netdev
>> maintainers.
>>
>> The original patchset determined the number of NVMe/TCP I/O queues
>> based on the number of online CPUs and the number of hardware queues
>> available on the NIC in kernel driver. This series moves that logic
>> to nvme-cli.
>>
>> When --nr-io-queues is not explicitly specified, nvme-cli determines
>> the egress netdev for the NVMe/TCP connection, retrieves its current
>> hardware queue count, and calculates the default as:
>>
>> min(nr_hw_queues, num_online_cpus)
>
> This looks reasonable Nilay.
>
Thank you...
> I am wandering tho if we want to place some lower limit here.
> For example, my laptop has a virtio device with 4 cpu cores and
> a single combined ring:
> --
> $ lscpu | grep NUMA
> NUMA node(s): 1
> NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-3
> $ ethtool -l enp7s0
> Channel parameters for enp7s0:
> Pre-set maximums:
> RX: n/a
> TX: n/a
> Other: n/a
> Combined: 1
> Current hardware settings:
> RX: n/a
> TX: n/a
> Other: n/a
> Combined: 1
> --
>
> It would be kinda annoying for me to now explicitly pass the nr-io-queues...
> I am wandering if some sort of threshold make sense as what you are aiming for
> is reducing the amount of queues for large cpu counts...
I think you're running a QEMU guest using user-mode (SLIRP) networking, so having
a combined queue count of 1 is expected.
I also tested this setup before posting the change. With QEMU user-mode networking,
increasing --nr-io-queues beyond 1 (I tried 4 and 8 with vCPU set to match those
numbers) did not improve performance. In fact, limiting --nr-io-queues to 1, which
matches the netdev's single combined queue, gave slightly better performance.
My understanding is that in this topology there is only a single underlying
virtqueue/network queue, so creating multiple NVMe/TCP I/O queues does not provide
additional network parallelism. Instead, those NVMe/TCP queues end up contending
on the same virtqueue/network queue, which can add overhead without providing additional
throughput.
So I'm inclined not to impose an arbitrary lower limit on --nr-io-queues. If the
egress netdev reports only one hardware queue, min(nr_hw_queues, num_online_cpus)
naturally gives 1, which seems like the appropriate choice for this topology. If
the goal is to achieve higher throughput in a QEMU guest, using a networking
configuration with multiqueue support (for example, multiqueue virtio with
vhost-net) would be more appropriate. In that case, the number of available netdev
hardware queues can scale beyond one, and the calculated nr-io-queues can make use
of that parallelism. Alternatively, with PCI/VFIO passthrough, the guest can directly
use the queues exposed by the physical NIC, allowing --nr-io-queues to scale
accordingly.
Thanks,
--Nilay
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-21 14:43 [PATCH 0/3] nvme-cli: NIC topology aware I/O queue scaling Nilay Shroff
2026-08-21 14:43 ` [PATCH 1/3] shared/net-util-linux: add support for retrieving egress netdev Nilay Shroff
2026-08-21 14:43 ` [PATCH 2/3] shared/net-util-linux: add support for retrieving NIC h/w queues Nilay Shroff
2026-08-21 14:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] fabrics: determine --nr-io-queues when not explicitly specified Nilay Shroff
2026-08-22 21:43 ` [PATCH 0/3] nvme-cli: NIC topology aware I/O queue scaling Sagi Grimberg
2026-08-24 8:48 ` Nilay Shroff [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=32bcaf68-a142-4612-9967-815dd28ee2a0@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=gjoyce@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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