From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ulf.hansson@linaro.org, broonie@kernel.org, lucmiccio@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH BUGFIX/IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: improve and refactor throughput-boosting logic
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 10:51:14 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <056bf889-3d05-8dac-e049-a2a7fd5eebd2@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170803164818.10562-1-paolo.valente@linaro.org>
On 08/03/2017 10:48 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> When a queue associated with a process remains empty, there are cases
> where throughput gets boosted if the device is idled to await the
> arrival of a new I/O request for that queue. Currently, BFQ assumes
> that one of these cases is when the device has no internal queueing
> (regardless of the properties of the I/O being served). Unfortunately,
> this condition has proved to be too general. So, this commit refines it
> as "the device has no internal queueing and is rotational".
>
> This refinement provides a significant throughput boost with random
> I/O, on flash-based storage without internal queueing. For example, on
> a HiKey board, throughput increases by up to 125%, growing, e.g., from
> 6.9MB/s to 15.6MB/s with two or three random readers in parallel.
>
> This commit also refactors the code related to device idling, for the
> following reason. Finding the change that provides the above large
> improvement has been slightly more difficult than it had to be,
> because the logic that decides whether to idle the device is still
> scattered across three functions. Almost all of the logic is in the
> function bfq_bfqq_may_idle, but (1) part of the decision is made in
> bfq_update_idle_window, and (2) the function bfq_bfqq_must_idle may
> switch off idling regardless of the output of bfq_bfqq_may_idle. In
> addition, both bfq_update_idle_window and bfq_bfqq_must_idle make
> their decisions as a function of parameters that are used, for similar
> purposes, also in bfq_bfqq_may_idle. This commit addresses this issue
> by moving all the logic into bfq_bfqq_may_idle.
This should be split into two patches - do one refactor patch that
doesn't change anything, then your functional change on top of that.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-03 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-03 16:48 [PATCH BUGFIX/IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: improve and refactor throughput-boosting logic Paolo Valente
2017-08-03 16:51 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=056bf889-3d05-8dac-e049-a2a7fd5eebd2@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucmiccio@gmail.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.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