From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756543Ab2GCOWb (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:22:31 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:61977 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753661Ab2GCOW3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2012 10:22:29 -0400 Message-ID: <4FF3001C.9020706@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2012 17:22:20 +0300 From: Ronen Hod User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dlaor@redhat.com CC: Rusty Russell , Asias He , kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] virtio-blk: Add bio-based IO path for virtio-blk References: <1340002390-3950-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> <1340002390-3950-4-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> <87hau9yse7.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <4FDEE0CB.1030505@redhat.com> <87zk81x7dp.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <4FDF0DA7.40604@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4FDF0DA7.40604@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/18/2012 02:14 PM, Dor Laor wrote: > On 06/18/2012 01:05 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: >> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:03:23 +0800, Asias He wrote: >>> On 06/18/2012 03:46 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: >>>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:53:10 +0800, Asias He wrote: >>>>> This patch introduces bio-based IO path for virtio-blk. >>>> >>>> Why make it optional? >>> >>> request-based IO path is useful for users who do not want to bypass the >>> IO scheduler in guest kernel, e.g. users using spinning disk. For users >>> using fast disk device, e.g. SSD device, they can use bio-based IO path. >> >> Users using a spinning disk still get IO scheduling in the host though. >> What benefit is there in doing it in the guest as well? > > The io scheduler waits for requests to merge and thus batch IOs together. It's not important w.r.t spinning disks since the host can do it but it causes much less vmexits which is the key issue for VMs. Does it make sense to use the guest's I/O scheduler at all? - It is not aware of the physical (spinning) disk layout. - It is not aware of all the host's disk pending requests. It does have a good side-effect - batching of requests. Ronen. > >> >> Cheers, >> Rusty. >> _______________________________________________ >> Virtualization mailing list >> Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html