From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@linux.intel.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav.pandit@avagotech.com>
Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NVMe: nvme_queue made cache friendly.
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 09:20:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150520132044.GD2729@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1432144863-31742-1-git-send-email-parav.pandit@avagotech.com>
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 02:01:03PM -0400, Parav Pandit wrote:
> nvme_queue structure made 64B cache friendly so that majority of the
> data elements of the structure during IO and completion path can be
> found in typical single 64B cache line size which was previously spanning beyond
> single 64B cache line size.
Have you done any performance measurements on this? I find it hard to
believe that moving q_lock to the second 64B cache line results in a
performance improvement. Seems to me it would result in a performance
loss, since you have to grab the lock before operating on the queue,
and cache line prefetching tends to prefetch the _next_ line, not the
_previous_ line.
> @@ -98,23 +98,23 @@ struct async_cmd_info {
> struct nvme_queue {
> struct device *q_dmadev;
> struct nvme_dev *dev;
> - char irqname[24]; /* nvme4294967295-65535\0 */
> - spinlock_t q_lock;
> struct nvme_command *sq_cmds;
> + struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
> volatile struct nvme_completion *cqes;
> - dma_addr_t sq_dma_addr;
> - dma_addr_t cq_dma_addr;
> u32 __iomem *q_db;
> u16 q_depth;
> - s16 cq_vector;
> u16 sq_head;
> u16 sq_tail;
> u16 cq_head;
> u16 qid;
> + s16 cq_vector;
> u8 cq_phase;
> u8 cqe_seen;
> + spinlock_t q_lock;
> struct async_cmd_info cmdinfo;
> - struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
> + char irqname[24]; /* nvme4294967295-65535\0 */
> + dma_addr_t sq_dma_addr;
> + dma_addr_t cq_dma_addr;
> };
>
> /*
> --
> 1.8.3.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-20 13:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-20 18:01 [PATCH] NVMe: nvme_queue made cache friendly Parav Pandit
2015-05-20 13:20 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2015-05-20 13:34 ` Parav Pandit
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=20150520132044.GD2729@linux.intel.com \
--to=willy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=parav.pandit@avagotech.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