From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Nate Diller <nate.diller@gmail.com>
Cc: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] speed up single bio_vec allocation
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 09:01:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061208080118.GD23887@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5c49b0ed0612071433o3a77be20h9b19326bf6a70281@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 07 2006, Nate Diller wrote:
> On 12/7/06, Chen, Kenneth W <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote:
> >Nate Diller wrote on Thursday, December 07, 2006 1:46 PM
> >> the current code is straightforward and obviously correct. you want
> >> to make the alloc/dealloc paths more complex, by special-casing for an
> >> arbitrary limit of "small" I/O, AFAICT. of *course* you can expect
> >> less overhead when you're doing one large I/O vs. two small ones,
> >> that's the whole reason we have all this code to try to coalesce
> >> contiguous I/O, do readahead, swap page clustering, etc. we *want*
> >> more complexity if it will get us bigger I/Os. I don't see why we
> >> want more complexity to reduce the *inherent* penalty of doing smaller
> >> ones.
> >
> >You should check out the latest proposal from Jens Axboe which treats
> >all biovec size the same and stuff it along with struct bio. I think
> >it is a better approach than my first cut of special casing 1 segment
> >biovec. His patch will speed up all sized I/O.
>
> i rather agree with his reservations on that, since we'd be making the
> allocator's job harder by requesting order 1 pages for all allocations
> on x86_64 large I/O patterns. but it reduces complexity instead of
> increasing it ... can you produce some benchmarks not just for your
> workload but for one that triggers the order 1 case? biovec-(256)
> transfers are more common than you seem to think, and if the allocator
> can't do it, that forces the bio code to fall back to 2 x biovec-128,
> which, as you indicated above, would show a real penalty.
The question is if the slab allocator is only doing 2^0 order
allocations for the 256-page bio_vec currently - it's at 4096 bytes, so
potentially (I suspect) the worst size it could be.
On the 1 vs many page bio_vec patterns, I agree with Nate. I do see lots
of larger bio_vecs here. > 1 page bio_vec usage is also becoming more
prevalent, not less. So optimizing for a benchmark case that
predominately uses 1 page bio's is indeed a silly thing.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-08 8:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-04 19:27 [patch] speed up single bio_vec allocation Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-04 20:06 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-04 20:36 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-04 20:43 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-06 10:08 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-06 10:56 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-06 18:19 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-07 19:22 ` Nate Diller
2006-12-07 19:36 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-07 21:46 ` Nate Diller
2006-12-07 21:52 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-07 22:33 ` Nate Diller
2006-12-08 8:01 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2006-12-08 2:27 ` Andi Kleen
2006-12-08 4:23 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-08 4:37 ` Andi Kleen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-08 22:14 Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-14 20:23 ` Jens Axboe
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=20061208080118.GD23887@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nate.diller@gmail.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