From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: "Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Cc: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Foong, Annie" <annie.foong@intel.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Nadolski, Edmund" <edmund.nadolski@intel.com>,
"Skirvin, Jeffrey D" <jeffrey.d.skirvin@intel.com>
Subject: Re: rq_affinity doesn't seem to work?
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 22:30:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E1CAEEB.8050506@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D010E79907AF0D4E90B603DE907837D504CA6365D6@azsmsx504.amr.corp.intel.com>
On 2011-07-12 21:03, Jiang, Dave wrote:
> Jens,
> I'm doing some performance tuning for the Intel isci SAS controller
> driver, and I noticed some interesting numbers with mpstat. Looking at
> the numbers it seems that rq_affinity is not moving the request
> completion to the request submission CPU. Using fio to saturate the
> system with 512B I/Os, I noticed that all I/Os are bound to the CPUs
> (CPUs 6 and 7) that service the hard irqs. I have put in a quick hack
> in the driver so that it records the CPU during request construction
> and then I try to steer the scsi->done() calls to the request CPUs.
> With this simple hack, mpstat shows that the soft irq contexts are now
> distributed. I observed significant performance increase. The iowait%
> gone from 30s and 40s to low single digit approaching 0. Any ideas
> what could be happening with the rq_affinity logic? I'm assuming
> rq_affinity should behave the way my hacked solution is behaving. This
> is running on an 8 core single CPU SandyBridge based system with
> hyper-threading turned off. The two MSIX interrupts on the controller
> are tied to CPU 6 and 7 respectively via /proc/irq/X/smp_affinity. I'm
> running fio with 8 SAS disks and 8 threads.
It's probably the grouping, we need to do something about that. Does the
below patch make it behave as you expect?
diff --git a/block/blk.h b/block/blk.h
index d658628..17d53d8 100644
--- a/block/blk.h
+++ b/block/blk.h
@@ -157,6 +157,7 @@ static inline int queue_congestion_off_threshold(struct request_queue *q)
static inline int blk_cpu_to_group(int cpu)
{
+#if 0
int group = NR_CPUS;
#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_MC
const struct cpumask *mask = cpu_coregroup_mask(cpu);
@@ -168,6 +169,7 @@ static inline int blk_cpu_to_group(int cpu)
#endif
if (likely(group < NR_CPUS))
return group;
+#endif
return cpu;
}
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-12 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-12 19:03 rq_affinity doesn't seem to work? Jiang, Dave
2011-07-12 20:30 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-07-12 21:17 ` Jiang, Dave
2011-07-13 17:10 ` Matthew Wilcox
2011-07-13 18:00 ` Jens Axboe
2011-07-14 17:02 ` Roland Dreier
2011-07-15 20:20 ` Dan Williams
2011-07-15 23:43 ` ersatz splatt
2011-07-16 2:12 ` ersatz splatt
2011-07-16 2:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=4E1CAEEB.8050506@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=annie.foong@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=edmund.nadolski@intel.com \
--cc=jeffrey.d.skirvin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.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