From: Andrew Vasquez <andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] add sysfs to dynamically control blk request tag maintenance
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 09:57:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051007165717.GB8370@plap.qlogic.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B05667366EE6204181EABE9C1B1C0EB5086AEC33@scsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Fri, 07 Oct 2005, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote on Friday, October 07, 2005 1:08 AM
> > > It's probably a very small number that I'm chasing with avoiding blk
> > > layer tagging. Nevertheless, any number no matter how small, is a
> gold
> > > mine to me :-)
> > >
> > > Latest execution profile taken with 2.6.14-rc2 kernel with "industry
> > > standard transaction processing database workload". First column is
> > > clock ticks (a direct measure of time), 2nd column is instruction
> > > retired,
> > > and 3rd column is number of L3 misses occurred inside the function.
> > >
> > > Symbol Clockticks Inst. Retired L3
> Misses
> > > scsi_request_fn 8.12% 9.27% 11.18%
> > > Schedule 6.52% 4.93% 7.26%
> > > scsi_end_request 4.44% 3.59% 6.76%
> > > __blockdev_direct_IO 4.28% 4.38% 3.98%
> > > __make_request 3.59% 4.16% 3.47%
> > > __wake_up 2.46% 1.56% 3.33%
> > > dio_bio_end_io 2.14% 1.67% 3.18%
> > > aio_complete 2.05% 1.27% 3.56%
> > > kmem_cache_free 1.95% 1.70% 0.71%
> > > kmem_cache_alloc 1.45% 1.84% 0.45%
> > > put_page 1.42% 0.60% 1.27%
> > > follow_hugetlb_page 1.41% 0.75% 1.27%
> > > __generic_file_aio_read 1.37% 0.36% 1.68%
> >
> > The above looks pretty much as expected. What change in profile did
> you
> > see when eliminating the blk_queue_end_tag() call?
>
> I haven't make any measurement yet. The original patch was an RFC, and
> I want to hear opinions from the experts first. I will do a measurement
> with the change in qla2x00 driver and I will let you know how much
> difference does it make. Most likely, clock ticks in scsi_request_fn
> and
> scsi_end_request should be reduced. It will be interesting to see L3
> misses stats as well.
Yes, please let us know what your benchmarking measurements show. I
take it you are planning on doing something like:
--- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_os.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_os.c
@@ -1101,10 +1101,7 @@ qla2xxx_slave_configure(struct scsi_devi
scsi_qla_host_t *ha = to_qla_host(sdev->host);
struct fc_rport *rport = starget_to_rport(sdev->sdev_target);
- if (sdev->tagged_supported)
- scsi_activate_tcq(sdev, 32);
- else
- scsi_deactivate_tcq(sdev, 32);
+ scsi_adjust_queue_depth(sdev, scsi_get_tag_type(sdev), depth);
rport->dev_loss_tmo = ha->port_down_retry_count + 5;
Thanks,
Andrew Vasquez
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-07 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-07 8:13 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-07 16:57 ` Andrew Vasquez [this message]
2005-10-07 18:17 ` Jens Axboe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-10-07 8:04 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-07 7:52 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-07 8:07 ` Jens Axboe
2005-10-07 7:35 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-07 7:41 ` Jens Axboe
2005-10-07 7:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-07 8:06 ` Jens Axboe
2005-10-07 8:25 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-10-07 2:46 Chen, Kenneth W
2005-10-07 7:23 ` 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=20051007165717.GB8370@plap.qlogic.org \
--to=andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.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®