From: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"czoccolo@gmail.com" <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/3]cfq-iosched: don't idle if a deep seek queue is slow
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:06:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD811ED.8010901@fusionio.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101108142054.GB16767@redhat.com>
On 2010-11-08 15:20, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 10:07:25AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
>> If a deep seek queue slowly deliver requests but disk is much faster, idle
>> for the queue just wastes disk throughput. If the queue delevers all requests
>> before half its slice is used, the patch disable idle for it.
>> In my test, application delivers 32 requests one time, the disk can accept
>> 128 requests at maxium and disk is fast. without the patch, the throughput
>> is just around 30m/s, while with it, the speed is about 80m/s. The disk is
>> a SSD, but is detected as a rotational disk. I can configure it as SSD, but
>> I thought the deep seek queue logic should be fixed too, for example,
>> considering a fast raid.
>>
>
> Hi Shaohua,
>
> So looks like you are trying to cut down queue idling in the case when
> device is fast and idling hurts. That's a noble goal, just that detetction
> of this condition only for deep queues does not seem to cover lots of
> cases. Manually one can set slice_idle=0 to handle this situation.
>
> What about if you have lots of sequential queues (not deep) and they all
> will still idle.
>
> Secondly, what if driver is just buffering lots of requests in its device
> queue and not necessarily device is processing the reuqests faster.
That is not a valid concern, a driver should never extract more than it
can process (pretty much) immediately.
> So I think it is a good idea to cut down on idling if we can find that
> underlying device is fast and idling on queue might hurt more. But
> discovering this only using deep queues does not sound very appleaing to
> me. This is help only a particular workload which is driving deep queues.
> So if there was a generic mechanism to tackle this, that would be much
> better.
Agree, we could use better metrics for this.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-08 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-08 2:07 [patch 3/3]cfq-iosched: don't idle if a deep seek queue is slow Shaohua Li
2010-11-08 14:20 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-11-08 15:06 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2010-11-09 1:36 ` Shaohua Li
2010-11-09 2:28 ` Vivek Goyal
2010-11-09 2:31 ` Shaohua Li
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=4CD811ED.8010901@fusionio.com \
--to=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=vgoyal@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