mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "André Draszik" <andre.draszik@linaro.org>
To: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
	Alim Akhtar	 <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	Bart Van Assche	 <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley"	 <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen"	 <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
	 linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@linaro.org>,
	Will McVicker <willmcvicker@google.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v3 3/3] ufs: core: delegate the interrupt service routine to a threaded irq handler
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 13:04:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1e06161bf49a3a88c4ea2e7a406815be56114c4f.camel@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250407-topic-ufs-use-threaded-irq-v3-3-08bee980f71e@linaro.org>

Hi,

On Mon, 2025-04-07 at 12:17 +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On systems with a large number request slots and unavailable MCQ ESI,
> the current design of the interrupt handler can delay handling of
> other subsystems interrupts causing display artifacts, GPU stalls
> or system firmware requests timeouts.
> 
> Since the interrupt routine can take quite some time, it's
> preferable to move it to a threaded handler and leave the
> hard interrupt handler wake up the threaded interrupt routine,
> the interrupt line would be masked until the processing is
> finished in the thread thanks to the IRQS_ONESHOT flag.
> 
> When MCQ & ESI interrupts are enabled the I/O completions are now
> directly handled in the "hard" interrupt routine to keep IOPs high
> since queues handling is done in separate per-queue interrupt routines.

This patch adversely affects Pixel 6 UFS performance. It has a
UFSHCI v3.x controller I believe (and therefore probably all
devices with < v4) - if my limited understanding is correct,
MCQ & ESI are a feature of v4 controllers only.

On Pixel 6, fio reports following performance on linux-next with
this patch:

read [1] / write [2]:
   READ: bw=17.1MiB/s (17.9MB/s), 17.1MiB/s-17.1MiB/s (17.9MB/s-17.9MB/s), io=684MiB (718MB), run=40001-40001msec
  WRITE: bw=20.6MiB/s (21.5MB/s), 20.6MiB/s-20.6MiB/s (21.5MB/s-21.5MB/s), io=822MiB (862MB), run=40003-40003msec

With this patch reverted, performance changes back to:

read [1] / write [2]:

   READ: bw=19.9MiB/s (20.8MB/s), 19.9MiB/s-19.9MiB/s (20.8MB/s-20.8MB/s), io=795MiB (833MB), run=40001-40001msec
  WRITE: bw=28.0MiB/s (29.4MB/s), 28.0MiB/s-28.0MiB/s (29.4MB/s-29.4MB/s), io=1122MiB (1176MB), run=40003-40003msec

all over multiple runs.

which is a ~26% reduction for write and ~14% reduction for read.

PCBenchmark even reports performance drops of ~41%.


I don't know much about UFS at this stage, but could the code simply
check for the controller version and revert to original behaviour
if < v4? Any thoughts on such a change?


[1]: fio --name=randread --rw=randread --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 \
         --bs=4k --numjobs=1 --size=1g --ramp_time=10 --runtime=40 --time_based \
         --end_fsync=1 --group_reporting --filename=/foo

[2]: fio --name=randwrite --rw=randwrite --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 \
         --bs=4k --numjobs=1 --size=1g --ramp_time=10 --runtime=40 --time_based \
         --end_fsync=1 --group_reporting --filename=/foo

Cheers,
Andre'

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-07-21 12:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-07 10:17 [PATCH RFT v3 0/3] ufs: core: cleanup and " Neil Armstrong
2025-04-07 10:17 ` [PATCH RFT v3 1/3] ufs: core: drop last_intr_status/ts stats Neil Armstrong
2025-04-07 10:17 ` [PATCH RFT v3 2/3] ufs: core: track when MCQ ESI is enabled Neil Armstrong
2025-04-07 19:36   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-04-07 10:17 ` [PATCH RFT v3 3/3] ufs: core: delegate the interrupt service routine to a threaded irq handler Neil Armstrong
2025-04-07 19:44   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-07-21 12:04   ` André Draszik [this message]
2025-07-21 12:10     ` André Draszik
2025-07-21 15:28     ` Bart Van Assche
2025-07-22  9:22       ` André Draszik
2025-07-24  9:55         ` André Draszik
2025-07-28 23:11   ` Nitin Rawat
2025-04-12  1:25 ` [PATCH RFT v3 0/3] ufs: core: cleanup and " Martin K. Petersen

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=1e06161bf49a3a88c4ea2e7a406815be56114c4f.camel@linaro.org \
    --to=andre.draszik@linaro.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
    --cc=peter.griffin@linaro.org \
    --cc=tudor.ambarus@linaro.org \
    --cc=willmcvicker@google.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®