From: John Meneghini <jmeneghi@redhat.com>
To: Ewan Milne <emilne@redhat.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com>
Cc: "tsong@purestorage.com" <tsong@purestorage.com>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy "queue-depth"
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 18:32:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d87cff63-a0da-43ca-979d-38657b351511@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGtn9rnEqs0OKeg52+UCwkvU2kiVkMKDXe-pxDUHn-77i5e9sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Here are the slides with the performance numbers I presented at ALPSS.
https://people.redhat.com/jmeneghi/ALPSS_2023/NVMe_QD_Multipathing.pdf
This is the same information I posted in:
https://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2023-September/042371.html
/John
On 11/7/23 16:56, Ewan Milne wrote:
> Yes, we have some graphs. John M. presented them at ALPSS and there were
> some earlier ones at LSF/MM. I'll see if I can put up the latest set
> for download.
>
> The basic issue is that with round-robin, requests for most/all of the
> tagset space
> can end up on a path that is responding slowly, so we see a
> significant imbalance
> in path utilization.
>
>
> -Ewan
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 4:46 PM Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/7/23 13:23, Ewan D. Milne wrote:
>>> The existing iopolicies are inefficient in some cases, such as
>>> the presence of a path with high latency. The round-robin
>>> policy would use that path equally with faster paths, which
>>> results in sub-optimal performance.
>>
>> do you have performance numbers for such case ?
>>
>>> The queue-depth policy instead sends I/O requests down the path
>>> with the least amount of requests in its request queue. Paths
>>> with lower latency will clear requests more quickly and have less
>>> requests in their queues compared to "bad" paths. The aim is to
>>> use those paths the most to bring down overall latency.
>>>
>>> This implementation adds an atomic variable to the nvme_ctrl
>>> struct to represent the queue depth. It is updated each time a
>>> request specific to that controller starts or ends.
>>>
>>> [edm: patch developed by Thomas Song @ Pure Storage, fixed whitespace
>>> and compilation warnings, updated MODULE_PARM description, and
>>> fixed potential issue with ->current_path[] being used]
>>>
>>> Co-developed-by: Thomas Song <tsong@purestorage.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>
>> any performance comparison that shows the difference ?
>>
>> -ck
>>
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-07 23:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-07 21:23 [PATCH 1/3] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy "queue-depth" Ewan D. Milne
2023-11-07 21:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] nvme: multipath: only update ctrl->nr_active when using queue-depth iopolicy Ewan D. Milne
2023-11-07 21:42 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2023-11-07 21:53 ` Keith Busch
2023-11-07 22:03 ` Ewan Milne
2023-11-08 8:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-08 16:58 ` John Meneghini
2023-11-08 18:38 ` Ewan Milne
2023-11-10 1:18 ` Uday Shankar
2023-11-13 21:16 ` Ewan Milne
2023-11-07 21:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme: multipath: Invalidate current_path when changing iopolicy Ewan D. Milne
2023-11-08 8:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-11-07 21:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy "queue-depth" Chaitanya Kulkarni
2023-11-07 21:46 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2023-11-07 21:56 ` Ewan Milne
2023-11-07 23:32 ` John Meneghini [this message]
2023-11-08 4:14 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2023-11-07 21:49 ` Keith Busch
2023-11-07 22:01 ` Ewan Milne
2023-11-07 22:14 ` Keith Busch
2024-05-09 20:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] nvme: queue-depth multipath iopolicy John Meneghini
2024-05-09 20:29 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] nvme: multipath: Implemented new iopolicy "queue-depth" John Meneghini
2024-05-09 20:29 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] nvme: multipath: only update ctrl->nr_active when using queue-depth iopolicy John Meneghini
2024-05-09 20:29 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] nvme: multipath: Invalidate current_path when changing iopolicy John Meneghini
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=d87cff63-a0da-43ca-979d-38657b351511@redhat.com \
--to=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
--cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=tsong@purestorage.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