From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>,
Xixin Liu <liuxixin@kylinos.cn>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de, kbusch@kernel.org,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: blktests nvme/062 lockdep — defer TLS inline send to io_work?
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 14:34:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee0225fa-6a0b-4933-9a4d-5c77792eb94b@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aoPuIUSQvZxujmv7@shinhome>
On 8/18/26 7:38 AM, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> On Jul 01, 2026 / 09:50, Xixin Liu wrote:
>> Hi Hannes,
>>
>> On Mon, 29 Jun 2026, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>>> The most likely testcase showing regressions would be having as many
>>> jobs as your machine has CPUs and use qd=1.
>>> Just a single job will not be enough to show a noticeable difference.
>>
>> I re-ran the TLS perf comparison with one job per CPU and queue depth 1
>> on a new test host. Please treat the results below as the authoritative
>> perf data for this workload.
>>
>> Test setup
>> ----------
>> aarch64 server, 128 CPUs, linux-next 7.2.0-rc1-*-perf-dirty
>>
>> Same-machine nvmet-tcp with TLS; target backing store is a 32G file on a
>> local NVMe SSD. fio runs against the connected nvme-tcp namespace.
>>
>> Compared inline send_all (baseline) vs deferring TLS inline send (io_work).
>> fio randwrite 4k, direct I/O, 30s per run, 15s warmup discarded before
>> each mode (10 runs total):
>>
>> - iodepth=1, numjobs=128:
>> baseline 54539.4 IOPS, mean 2.34ms, p99 6.02ms
>> patched 54529.0 IOPS, mean 2.34ms, p99 5.99ms
>>
>> - iodepth=128, numjobs=8:
>> baseline 54632.6 IOPS, mean 18.74ms, p99 47.08ms
>> patched 54633.6 IOPS, mean 18.74ms, p99 46.92ms
>>
>> So on a 128-CPU box with the workload you called out, deferring TLS inline
>> send still looks neutral across 10 consecutive runs after warmup.
>
> Xixin, thank you for the effort. The nvme/062 lockdep WARN still exists with
> v7.2 kernel. Per your suggestion, I applied the patch below [*] on top of v7.2
> kernel, and confirmed the nvme/062 goes away. This is great from blktests user
> point of view.
>
> Hannes, Xixin provided the latency numbers above. Are they enough to show no
> impact of the fix patch? Or do you think more workload variations should be
> covered?
>
>
> [*] trial patch
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c b/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> index ba5c7b3e2a7c..122d815270b9 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> @@ -411,6 +411,7 @@ static inline void nvme_tcp_queue_request(struct nvme_tcp_request *req,
> * are on the same cpu, so we don't introduce contention.
> */
> if (queue->io_cpu == raw_smp_processor_id() &&
> + !nvme_tcp_queue_tls(queue) &&
> empty && mutex_trylock(&queue->send_mutex)) {
> nvme_tcp_send_all(queue);
> mutex_unlock(&queue->send_mutex);
I actually thought we could do away with this 'if' condition completely.
But that I guess requires more analysis. So for now:
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@kernel.org>
Can you send a formal patch?
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-18 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-24 5:04 blktests failures with v7.1 kernel Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2026-06-26 1:19 ` blktests nvme/062 lockdep — defer TLS inline send to io_work? Xixin Liu
2026-06-26 6:40 ` Hannes Reinecke
2026-06-29 7:00 ` Xixin Liu
2026-07-01 1:50 ` Xixin Liu
2026-08-18 5:38 ` Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
2026-08-18 12:34 ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2026-08-19 0:50 ` [PATCH] nvme-tcp: defer TLS inline send to io_work Xixin Liu
2026-08-25 2:57 ` Keith Busch
2026-08-19 1:05 ` blktests nvme/062 lockdep, defer TLS inline send to io_work? Xixin Liu
2026-08-22 23:02 ` blktests nvme/062 lockdep — " Sagi Grimberg
2026-08-24 6:00 ` blktests nvme/062 lockdep, " Xixin Liu
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=ee0225fa-6a0b-4933-9a4d-5c77792eb94b@suse.de \
--to=hare@suse.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=liuxixin@kylinos.cn \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.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