From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C57AEE77188 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 09:50:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=gt8OXPPuddA1H17xFc6d0SWz9y6Zvt3VIXojKtzxoyM=; b=hi88wZnOjaVU2xoenNacOhmsn6 QofzKPnNOHb/XFHNDMADfB+MbwaYhR+kV6uQf57jhQkZ33mPWahcDD/55p/90N9cGzMkop6se+XF4 5GqvAbk9jSCY1DdS2cLJtxTBqqE+alk7LI7xyq14cUz05mFgSI/nkw2mGA+Rhs3HjDB8U5m6HePB0 N5RC39ogq98FqqilnooayzSNyOhgUi01RrN1qvvF9NATHwJFDzYOAzVMKIVhb91YT2wfOGdV4FvL7 ZspEMProETxzgw66mj9FVMIReuTsEu8AzDypLKplgC+iZL6lTbLZHjgsGqNYs3IfHL9NLwucxhJkv 9aTBoIIw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tTHqs-0000000A5td-0ld6; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 09:50:50 +0000 Received: from nyc.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:45d1:ec00::3]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tTHps-0000000A5jq-1obX for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 09:49:49 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by nyc.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A82AA40A4E; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 09:47:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B2992C4CED6; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 09:49:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1735811387; bh=tXfAAU26K170fcnqh0owN8PXAjsnMTBCFumiGjaOeBg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=jymOAf3D7m3mfa7J4H+4AdQp8u9ITBFukQZjQSGCcf1jCIi+tFh8LUPsn93CKUekn ZV+A3NPZPdfCraH+d/Df8654DTUCWxocnkDuxolncQhl6spIpsAgKyCU6S0/vd+FPo fM+UTBqmZag9Re3Wm509djGWaeGHZGqbHDI/1lMV9dUloHcwcZM5hZ/2pBOCyoPbXD a2QgPtWadwW1B1HFWk37zRFS8bWsstfnpydiYRy7k+2ZSi/vyfWAqp/uu7C3tJlkfG djL+YkI4j1sLsY3lz31p9rzKQ8EhaRP45bHWa57AUvECyfDSI0mBWdfkYR4gBscK2p i06VwGFRO/JNg== Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 10:49:41 +0100 From: Niklas Cassel To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Oliver Sang , oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Damien Le Moal Subject: Re: [linus:master] [block] e70c301fae: stress-ng.aiol.ops_per_sec 49.6% regression Message-ID: References: <202412122112.ca47bcec-lkp@intel.com> <20241213143224.GA16111@lst.de> <20241217045527.GA16091@lst.de> <20241217065614.GA19113@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241217065614.GA19113@lst.de> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250102_014948_535171_1C4D6857 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 14.13 ) X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hello Oliver, Christoph, On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 07:56:14AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 02:55:23PM +0800, Oliver Sang wrote: > > from below information, it seems an 'ahci' to me. but since I have limited > > knowledge about storage driver, maybe I'm wrong. if you want more information, > > please let us know. thanks a lot! > > Yes, this looks like ahci. Thanks a lot! Did this ever get resolved? I haven't seen a patch that seems to address this. AHCI (ata_scsi_queuecmd()) only issues a single command, so if there is any reordering when issuing a batch of commands, my guess is that the problem also affects SCSI / the problem is in upper layers above AHCI, i.e. SCSI lib or block layer. Kind regards, Niklas