Re: [PATCH V3 00/11] vhost: multiple worker support

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 12:18:59AM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> The following patches apply over linus's tree and this patchset
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211007214448.6282-1-michael.christie@oracle.com/
> 
> which allows us to check the vhost owner thread's RLIMITs:


Unfortunately that patchset in turn triggers kbuild warnings.
I was hoping you would address them, I don't think
merging that patchset before kbuild issues are addressed
is possible.

It also doesn't have lots of acks, I'm a bit apprehensive
of merging core changes like this through the vhost tree.
Try to CC more widely/ping people?

> It looks like that patchset has been ok'd by all the major parties
> and just needs a small cleanup to apply to Jens and Paul trees, so I
> wanted to post my threading patches based over it for review.
> 
> The following patches allow us to support multiple vhost workers per
> device. I ended up just doing Stefan's original idea where userspace has
> the kernel create a worker and we pass back the pid. This has the benefit
> over the workqueue and userspace thread approach where we only have
> one'ish code path in the kernel during setup to detect old tools. The
> main IO paths and device/vq setup/teardown paths all use common code.
> 
> I've also included a patch for qemu so you can get an idea of how it
> works. If we are ok with the kernel code then I'll break that up into
> a patchset and send to qemu-devel for review.
> 
> Results:
> --------
> 
> fio jobs        1       2       4       8       12      16
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 1 worker        84k    492k    510k    -       -       -
> worker per vq   184k   380k    744k    1422k   2256k   2434k
> 
> Notes:
> 0. This used a simple fio command:
> 
> fio --filename=/dev/sdb  --direct=1 --rw=randrw --bs=4k \
> --ioengine=libaio --iodepth=128  --numjobs=$JOBS_ABOVE
> 
> and I used a VM with 16 vCPUs and 16 virtqueues.
> 
> 1. The patches were tested with emulate_pr=0 and these patches:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/yq1tuhge4bg.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com/t/
> 
> which are in mkp's scsi branches for the next kernel. They fix the perf
> issues where IOPs dropped at 12 vqs/jobs.
> 
> 2. Because we have a hard limit of 1024 cmds, if the num jobs * iodepth
> was greater than 1024, I would decrease iodepth. So 12 jobs used 85 cmds,
> and 16 used 64.
> 
> 3. The perf issue above at 2 jobs is because when we only have 1 worker
> we execute more cmds per vhost_work due to all vqs funneling to one worker.
> This results in less context switches and better batching without having to
> tweak any settings. I'm working on patches to add back batching during lio
> completion and do polling on the submission side.
> 
> We will still want the threading patches, because if we batch at the fio
> level plus use the vhost theading patches, we can see a big boost like
> below. So hopefully doing it at the kernel will allow apps to just work
> without having to be smart like fio.
> 
> fio using io_uring and batching with the iodepth_batch* settings:
> 
> fio jobs        1       2       4       8       12      16
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 1 worker        494k    520k    -       -       -       -
> worker per vq   496k    878k    1542k   2436k   2304k   2590k
> 
> V3:
> - fully convert vhost code to use vq based APIs instead of leaving it
> half per dev and half per vq.
> - rebase against kernel worker API.
> - Drop delayed worker creation. We always create the default worker at
> VHOST_SET_OWNER time. Userspace can create and bind workers after that.
> 
> v2:
> - change loop that we take a refcount to the worker in
> - replaced pid == -1 with define.
> - fixed tabbing/spacing coding style issue
> - use hash instead of list to lookup workers.
> - I dropped the patch that added an ioctl cmd to get a vq's worker's
> pid. I saw we might do a generic netlink interface instead.
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization