linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Robert Elliot <Elliott@hp.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: scsi-mq
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:09:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A13B19.2010305@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53A10B3A.6050705@kernel.dk>

On 06/18/14 05:44, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Thanks for posting these numbers, Bart. The CPU utilization and IOPS
> speak a very clear message. The only mystery is why the singe threaded
> performance is down. That we need to get sort, but it's not a show
> stopper for inclusion.
> 
> If you run the single threaded tests and watch for queue depths, is
> there a difference between blk-mq=y/scsi-mq and the stock kernel?

Hello Jens,

Fio reports the same queue depth for use_blk_mq=Y (mq below) and 
use_blk_mq=N (sq below), namely ">=64". However, the number of context
switches differs significantly for the random read-write tests. From
the fio output for these tests:

$ grep ctx= {sq,mq}/randrw*
sq/randrw-1.txt:  cpu          : usr=10.25%, sys=89.42%, ctx=2210, majf=0, minf=1
sq/randrw-2.txt:  cpu          : usr=10.23%, sys=89.34%, ctx=5003, majf=0, minf=2
sq/randrw-3.txt:  cpu          : usr=9.36%, sys=90.21%, ctx=7947, majf=0, minf=3
sq/randrw-4.txt:  cpu          : usr=8.96%, sys=90.10%, ctx=19308, majf=0, minf=4
sq/randrw-5.txt:  cpu          : usr=8.97%, sys=89.70%, ctx=31494, majf=0, minf=5
sq/randrw-6.txt:  cpu          : usr=8.39%, sys=90.08%, ctx=47826, majf=0, minf=6
sq/randrw-7.txt:  cpu          : usr=7.65%, sys=89.65%, ctx=130563, majf=0, minf=7
sq/randrw-8.txt:  cpu          : usr=6.47%, sys=84.08%, ctx=753140, majf=0, minf=8
mq/randrw-1.txt:  cpu          : usr=1.43%, sys=14.43%, ctx=500998, majf=0, minf=1
mq/randrw-2.txt:  cpu          : usr=1.37%, sys=14.13%, ctx=979842, majf=0, minf=2
mq/randrw-3.txt:  cpu          : usr=1.47%, sys=14.81%, ctx=1547996, majf=0, minf=3
mq/randrw-4.txt:  cpu          : usr=1.79%, sys=16.51%, ctx=2321154, majf=0, minf=4
mq/randrw-5.txt:  cpu          : usr=2.49%, sys=22.09%, ctx=4145747, majf=0, minf=5
mq/randrw-6.txt:  cpu          : usr=2.98%, sys=27.07%, ctx=6356183, majf=0, minf=6
mq/randrw-7.txt:  cpu          : usr=3.39%, sys=30.48%, ctx=8675960, majf=0, minf=7
mq/randrw-8.txt:  cpu          : usr=3.37%, sys=31.46%, ctx=10462001, majf=0, minf=8

It seems like with the traditional SCSI mid-layer and block core (sq)
that the number of context switches does not depend too much on the
number of I/O operations but that for the multi-queue SCSI core there
are a little bit more than two context switches per I/O in the
particular test I ran. The "randrw" script I used for this test takes
SCSI LUNs as arguments (/dev/sdX) and starts the fio tool as follows:

for d in "$@"; do
    if [ ! -e "$d" ]; then
	echo "Error: device $d not found."
	exit 1
    fi
    bdev="/sys/class/block/$(basename $d)"
    if [ -e $bdev/queue ]; then
	echo 0    >$bdev/queue/add_random
	echo 0    >$bdev/queue/rotational
	echo 2    >$bdev/queue/rq_affinity
	echo noop >$bdev/queue/scheduler
    fi
done

"$(dirname $0)"/disable-frequency-scaling

fio --bs=512 --ioengine=libaio --rw=randrw --iodepth=128          \
    --iodepth_batch=64 --iodepth_batch_complete=64                \
    --buffered=0 --norandommap --thread --loops=$((2**31))        \
    --runtime=60 --group_reporting --gtod_reduce=1 --invalidate=1 \
    $(for d in "$@"; do echo --name=$d --filename=$d; done)

"$(dirname $0)"/restore-frequency-scaling

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2014-06-18  7:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-12 13:48 scsi-mq Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 01/14] sd: don't use rq->cmd_len before setting it up Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 02/14] scsi: split __scsi_queue_insert Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 03/14] scsi: centralize command re-queueing in scsi_dispatch_fn Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 04/14] scsi: set ->scsi_done before calling scsi_dispatch_cmd Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 05/14] scsi: push host_lock down into scsi_{host,target}_queue_ready Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 06/14] scsi: convert target_busy to an atomic_t Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:48 ` [PATCH 07/14] scsi: convert host_busy to atomic_t Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 08/14] scsi: convert device_busy " Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 09/14] scsi: fix the {host,target,device}_blocked counter mess Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 10/14] scsi: only maintain target_blocked if the driver has a target queue limit Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-21 22:10   ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-06-23  7:09     ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 11/14] scsi: unwind blk_end_request_all and blk_end_request_err calls Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 12/14] scatterlist: allow chaining to preallocated chunks Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 13/14] scsi: add support for a blk-mq based I/O path Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-12 13:49 ` [PATCH 14/14] fnic: reject device resets without assigned tags for the blk-mq case Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-13  6:42 ` scsi-mq Bart Van Assche
2014-06-17 14:27 ` scsi-mq Bart Van Assche
2014-06-18  3:44   ` scsi-mq Jens Axboe
2014-06-18  7:09     ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2014-06-21  0:52       ` scsi-mq Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-06-23  7:09         ` scsi-mq Christoph Hellwig
2014-06-19  0:58     ` scsi-mq Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)

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=53A13B19.2010305@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=Elliott@hp.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).