mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@hpe.com>
To: "snitzer@redhat.com" <snitzer@redhat.com>
Cc: "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dan.j.williams@intel.com" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
	"ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com" <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>,
	"agk@redhat.com" <agk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: dm stripe: add DAX support
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:22:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1468362104.8908.43.camel@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160624182859.GD13898@redhat.com>

On Fri, 2016-06-24 at 14:29 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> 
> BTW, if in your testing you could evaluate/quantify any extra overhead
> from DM that'd be useful to share.  It could be there are bottlenecks
> that need to be fixed, etc.

Here are some results from fio benchmark.  The test is single-threaded and is
bound to one CPU.

 DAX  LVM   IOPS   NOTE
 ---------------------------------------
  Y    N    790K
  Y    Y    754K   5% overhead with LVM
  N    N    567K
  N    Y    457K   20% overhead with LVM

 DAX: Y: mount -o dax,noatime, N: mount -o noatime
 LVM: Y: dm-linear on pmem0 device, N: pmem0 device
 fio: bs=4k, size=2G, direct=1, rw=randread, numjobs=1

Among the 5% overhead with DAX/LVM, the new DM direct_access interfaces
account for less than 0.5%.

 dm_blk_direct_access 0.28%
 linear_direct_access 0.17%

The average latency increases slightly from 0.93us to 0.95us.  I think most of
the overhead comes from the submit_bio() path, which is used only for
accessing metadata with DAX.  I believe this is due to cloning bio for each
request in DM.  There is 12% more L2 miss in total.

Without DAX, 20% overhead is observed with LVM.  Average latency increases
from 1.39us to 1.82us.  Without DAX, bio is cloned for both data and metadata.

Thanks,
-Toshi

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-07-12 22:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-24 18:23 [PATCH] " Toshi Kani
2016-06-24 18:29 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-06-24 18:42   ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2016-07-12 22:22   ` Kani, Toshimitsu [this message]
2016-07-13  2:01     ` Mike Snitzer
2016-07-13 15:03       ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2016-07-21  0:01         ` Mike Snitzer
2016-07-21  3:03           ` Jens Axboe
2016-06-24 19:58 ` [PATCH] " kbuild test robot
2016-06-24 20:02   ` Mike Snitzer
2016-06-24 20:46     ` Kani, Toshimitsu
2016-06-24 19:59 ` [PATCH] " kbuild test robot

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=1468362104.8908.43.camel@hpe.com \
    --to=toshi.kani@hpe.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.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

Powered by JetHome