From: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [patch]block: avoid building too big plug list
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 09:59:27 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1310090367.15392.263.camel@sli10-conroe> (raw)
When I test fio script with big I/O depth, I found the total throughput drops
compared to some relative small I/O depth. The reason is the thread accumulates
big requests in its plug list and causes some delays (surely this depends
on CPU speed).
I thought we'd better have a threshold for requests. When a threshold reaches,
this means there is no request merge and queue lock contention isn't severe
when pushing per-task requests to queue, so the main advantages of blk plug
don't exist. We can force a plug list flush in this case.
With this, my test throughput actually increases and almost equals to small
I/O depth. Another side effect is irq off time decreases in blk_flush_plug_list()
for big I/O depth.
The BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT is choosen arbitarily, but 16 is efficiently to
reduce lock contention to me. But I'm open here, 32 is ok in my test too.
Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
---
block/blk-core.c | 5 +++++
include/linux/blkdev.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
Index: linux/block/blk-core.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/block/blk-core.c 2011-07-07 09:07:11.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/block/blk-core.c 2011-07-08 09:49:41.000000000 +0800
@@ -1302,7 +1302,10 @@ get_rq:
plug->should_sort = 1;
}
list_add_tail(&req->queuelist, &plug->list);
+ plug->count++;
drive_stat_acct(req, 1);
+ if (plug->count >= BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT)
+ blk_flush_plug_list(plug, false);
} else {
spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
add_acct_request(q, req, where);
@@ -2626,6 +2629,7 @@ void blk_start_plug(struct blk_plug *plu
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&plug->list);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&plug->cb_list);
plug->should_sort = 0;
+ plug->count = 0;
/*
* If this is a nested plug, don't actually assign it. It will be
@@ -2709,6 +2713,7 @@ void blk_flush_plug_list(struct blk_plug
return;
list_splice_init(&plug->list, &list);
+ plug->count = 0;
if (plug->should_sort) {
list_sort(NULL, &list, plug_rq_cmp);
Index: linux/include/linux/blkdev.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/include/linux/blkdev.h 2011-07-07 09:07:11.000000000 +0800
+++ linux/include/linux/blkdev.h 2011-07-08 09:49:24.000000000 +0800
@@ -862,7 +862,10 @@ struct blk_plug {
struct list_head list;
struct list_head cb_list;
unsigned int should_sort;
+ unsigned int count;
};
+#define BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT 16
+
struct blk_plug_cb {
struct list_head list;
void (*callback)(struct blk_plug_cb *);
next reply other threads:[~2011-07-08 1:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-08 1:59 Shaohua Li [this message]
2011-07-08 6:17 ` 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=1310090367.15392.263.camel@sli10-conroe \
--to=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®