From: "Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>
To: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@ics.muni.cz>
Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>,
agk@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: request baset device mapper in Linux
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 14:11:39 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E8D388B.5020302@ce.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111005103545.GQ14063@ics.muni.cz>
Hi Lukas,
On 10/05/11 19:35, Lukas Hejtmanek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 05:13:36PM +0900, Jun'ichi Nomura wrote:
>>> yes, 3GB/s and only kwapd0 and kswapd1 is running, no kworker or ksoftirqd..
>>
>> Hmm.. did you find any difference in your profile this time?
>
> not sure what do you mean.
With SLES 2.6.32.36-0.5-default kernel, you found ksoftirqd
spent most of the time in __blk_recalc_rq_segments, using
sysprof/oprofile. That's why my patch was effective for it.
My question is whether you see such difference between
no-multipath and multipath, in profile data of 3.0.3 (without my patch).
>> I'm trying to reproduce it myself but no success so far
>> (perhaps disks are not fast enough to saturate CPU on my test machine).
>
> hmm, I have 80 SAS 2.0 disks and two E5640 @ 2.67GHz cpus.
>
>> As ksoftirqd in top implies your CPU4 gets too much I/O completions,
>> 'rq_affnity = 2' for both dm and SCSI devices might be a solution.
>> It'll distribute block completion softirqs to submitters and possibly
>> reduce the loads of the 1st CPU in the socket.
>> (See the commit below. It's a new feature of 3.1. Not available in 3.0...)
>
> So what next? Should I try 3.1 kernel with this patch applied?
Please try 3.1 (without my patch) + 'rq_affinity = 2',
on both multipath and no-multipath.
If you still see performance difference and ksoftirqd
spends most of the time in __blk_recalc_rq_segments,
try 3.1 + my patch + 'rq_affinity = 2'.
Thanks,
--
Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-06 5:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-20 8:26 request baset device mapper in Linux Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-07-21 11:11 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2011-07-21 13:26 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-07-22 6:56 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2011-07-22 8:19 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-07-23 7:28 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-07-24 22:16 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-08-01 9:31 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2011-09-08 13:27 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-09-15 18:49 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-09-16 14:08 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-09-19 5:50 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-09-29 20:57 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-10-05 8:13 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-10-05 10:35 ` Lukas Hejtmanek
2011-10-06 5:11 ` Jun'ichi Nomura [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=4E8D388B.5020302@ce.jp.nec.com \
--to=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=xhejtman@ics.muni.cz \
/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