From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Robert Elliott <relliott@beardog.cce.hp.com>,
elliott@hp.com, hch@lst.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: default to rq_affinity=2 for blk-mq
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:14:44 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54109514.4090901@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140910001801.9294.79720.stgit@beardog.cce.hp.com>
On 09/09/2014 06:18 PM, Robert Elliott wrote:
> From: Robert Elliott <elliott@hp.com>
>
> One change introduced by blk-mq is that it does all
> the completion work in hard irq context rather than
> soft irq context.
>
> On a 6 core system, if all interrupts are routed to
> one CPU, then you can easily run into this:
> * 5 CPUs submitting IOs
> * 1 CPU spending 100% of its time in hard irq context
> processing IO completions, not able to submit anything
> itself
>
> Example with CPU5 receiving all interrupts:
> CPU usage: CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 CPU4 CPU5
> %usr: 0.00 3.03 1.01 2.02 2.00 0.00
> %sys: 14.58 75.76 14.14 4.04 78.00 0.00
> %irq: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.01 0.00 100.00
> %soft: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
> %iowait idle: 85.42 21.21 84.85 92.93 20.00 0.00
> %idle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
>
> When the submitting CPUs are forced to process their own
> completion interrupts, this steals time from new
> submissions and self-throttles them.
>
> Without that, there is no direct feedback to the
> submitters to slow down. The only feedback is:
> * reaching max queue depth
> * lots of timeouts, resulting in aborts, resets, soft
> lockups and self-detected stalls on CPU5, bogus
> clocksource tsc unstable reports, network
> drop-offs, etc.
>
> The SCSI LLD can set affinity_hint for each of its
> interrupts to request that a program like irqbalance
> route the interrupts back to the submitting CPU.
> The latest version of irqbalance ignores those hints,
> though, instead offering an option to run a policy
> script that could honor them. Otherwise, it balances
> them based on its own algorithms. So, we cannot rely
> on this.
>
> Hardware might perform interrupt coalescing to help,
> but it cannot help 1 CPU keep up with the work
> generated by many other CPUs.
>
> rq_affinity=2 helps by pushing most of the block layer
> and SCSI midlayer completion work back to the submitting
> CPU (via an IPI).
>
> Change the default rq_affinity=2 under blk-mq
> so there's at least some feedback to slow down the
> submitters.
I don't think we should do this generically. For "sane" devices with
multiple completion queues, and with proper affinity setting in the
driver, this is going to be a loss.
So lets not add it to QUEUE_FLAG_MQ_DEFAULT, but we can make it default
for nr_hw_queues == 1. I think that would be way saner.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-10 18:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-10 0:17 [PATCH 0/2] block: rq_affinity default and reserved tag limits Robert Elliott
2014-09-10 0:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: default to rq_affinity=2 for blk-mq Robert Elliott
2014-09-10 18:14 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2014-09-10 19:35 ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2014-09-10 19:51 ` Jens Axboe
2014-09-10 0:18 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: return error if too many reserved tags are requested Robert Elliott
2014-09-10 18:17 ` 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=54109514.4090901@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=elliott@hp.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=relliott@beardog.cce.hp.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