From: Ping Gan <jacky_gam_2001@163.com>
To: sagi@grimberg.me, hare@suse.de, hch@lst.de
Cc: ping.gan@dell.com, kch@nvidia.com,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re:[PATCH v3 0/2] nvmet: use unbound_wq for RDMA and TCP by default
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 10:34:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240726023407.70799-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <196a9f11-ba97-4c9c-9815-0ddd0cb50808@grimberg.me>
> On 19/07/2024 12:19, Ping Gan wrote:
>> When running nvmf on SMP platform, current nvme target's RDMA and
>> TCP use bounded workqueue to handle IO, but when there is other high
>> workload on the system(eg: kubernetes), the competition between the
>> bounded kworker and other workload is very radical. To decrease the
>> resource race of OS among them, this patchset will switch to
>> unbounded
>> workqueue for nvmet-rdma and nvmet-tcp; besides that, it can also
>> get some performance improvement. And this patchset bases on previous
>> discussion from below session.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240719084953.8050-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com/
>
> Hold your horses.
>
> This cannot be just switched without a thorough testing and actual
> justification/proof of
> a benefit beyond just a narrow use-case brought initially by Ping Gan.
>
> If the ask is to universally use an unbound workqueue, please provide
> detailed
> benchmarking convincing us that this makes sense.
So you think we should not do a radical change for the narrow usecase
but
keep the parameter to enable it in previous version patch, right?
Thanks,
Ping
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-26 2:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-19 9:19 [PATCH " Ping Gan
2024-07-19 9:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] nvmet-tcp: use unbound_wq for nvmet-tcp " Ping Gan
2024-07-19 9:19 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] nvmet-rdma: use unbound_wq for nvmet-rdma " Ping Gan
2024-07-21 11:03 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] nvmet: use unbound_wq for RDMA and TCP " Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-26 2:34 ` Ping Gan [this message]
2024-07-27 19:36 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-07-31 7:03 ` Ping Gan
2024-07-31 7:36 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-08-02 3:39 ` [PATCH v30/2] " Ping Gan
2024-08-04 6:53 ` Sagi Grimberg
2024-08-06 10:08 ` Re :[PATCH v3 0/2] " Ping Gan
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=20240726023407.70799-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com \
--to=jacky_gam_2001@163.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kch@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ping.gan@dell.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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®