From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Laurence Oberman <loberman@redhat.com>
Cc: Anton Gavriliuk <antosha20xx@gmail.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Sequential read from NVMe/XFS twice slower on Fedora 42 than on Rocky 9.5
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 08:56:13 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aBlCDTm-grqM4WtY@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a1f322ab801e7f7037951578d289c5d18c6adc4d.camel@redhat.com>
On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 09:21:19AM -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-05-05 at 08:29 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-05-05 at 07:50 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > So the MD block device shows the same read performance as the
> > > filesystem on top of it. That means this is a regression at the MD
> > > device layer or in the block/driver layers below it. i.e. it is not
> > > an XFS of filesystem issue at all.
> > >
> > > -Dave.
> >
> > I have a lab setup, let me see if I can also reproduce and then trace
> > this to see where it is spending the time
> >
>
>
> Not seeing 1/2 the bandwidth but also significantly slower on Fedora42
> kernel.
> I will trace it
>
> 9.5 kernel - 5.14.0-503.40.1.el9_5.x86_64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=14.7GiB/s (15.8GB/s), 14.7GiB/s-14.7GiB/s (15.8GB/s-
> 15.8GB/s), io=441GiB (473GB), run=30003-30003msec
>
> Fedora42 kernel - 6.14.5-300.fc42.x86_64
>
> Run status group 0 (all jobs):
> READ: bw=10.4GiB/s (11.2GB/s), 10.4GiB/s-10.4GiB/s (11.2GB/s-
> 11.2GB/s), io=313GiB (336GB), run=30001-30001msec
So is this MD chunk size related? i.e. what is the chunk size
the MD device? Is it smaller than the IO size (256kB) or larger?
Does the regression go away if the chunk size matches the IO size,
or if the IO size vs chunk size relationship is reversed?
-Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-05 22:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-03 21:04 Sequential read from NVMe/XFS twice slower on Fedora 42 than on Rocky 9.5 Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-03 22:16 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-04 7:22 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-04 21:50 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-05 12:29 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-05 13:21 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-05 17:39 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-22 15:07 ` Laurence Oberman
2025-05-23 9:39 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-05 22:56 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2025-05-06 11:03 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-06 21:46 ` Dave Chinner
2025-05-07 12:26 ` Anton Gavriliuk
2025-05-07 21:59 ` Dave Chinner
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=aBlCDTm-grqM4WtY@dread.disaster.area \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=antosha20xx@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loberman@redhat.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