From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from m15.mail.163.com (m15.mail.163.com [45.254.50.220]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5B51B86C4 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 02:35:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.254.50.220 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721961352; cv=none; b=tsSryczeJnLfZQZFPrWayHQIPv4lADmTLlqmBWNnfA5cC4rm7lDu2Pp5QXZHKQ+XgsNw30aM1ymDEEJ1aS/Zbs3rGig6zF8PUEJ9JZXsG3PPl3+OysKEsG3C4FKZd3lMWheaUfpqCR5Nilyzy4La7rTsxHw6oD3Z1hGxx4tQGtE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721961352; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mVwTv/PU0FgZvKqjq9zEotYBoxvJYrG02XMlZ0LCiSc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=gjAL8FUcCFfio1ozK2tEEwR9anAnf6SN4f5o4uuEyUKVj4ff1gjM0qeN3RAMx9bYYYXfzzI1bZESBdLfbN3aYWZHYRuPcmdeDNyQWkwq8JMHNBmCmlgWNwTjwJ8wYph10SNqXO5x0sp7l71wZvti+Lx6TDpuJNwR0LS2DSf49jE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b=T41v94BM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.254.50.220 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b="T41v94BM" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=163.com; s=s110527; h=From:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; bh=eZ9r6 niTYNrCxK8B6XBW+XzVZwCXO5bwC8vmdFJG53g=; b=T41v94BMIzIpbf9lSZSce dTmrafWcn5nFy4+56SptlcRE+b6OD4Ai8iGHXSFSo3ss//aVkX5I1/MRs7OVftgH rfHpTiboGMm29wcANcbO3ou7zR2hwXuPR9DjCWI3spvmOOd8urU33wg1BwRN2BJS O8XTpPmioYtfAvNQthlz7A= Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [139.226.176.233]) by gzga-smtp-mta-g0-1 (Coremail) with SMTP id _____wD338RWC6NmhrIhAQ--.16234S2; Fri, 26 Jul 2024 10:35:03 +0800 (CST) From: Ping Gan 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 Message-Id: <20240726023407.70799-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.26.2 In-Reply-To: <196a9f11-ba97-4c9c-9815-0ddd0cb50808@grimberg.me> References: <196a9f11-ba97-4c9c-9815-0ddd0cb50808@grimberg.me> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CM-TRANSID:_____wD338RWC6NmhrIhAQ--.16234S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvdXoWrZF4rJF18try8WF15GF18AFb_yoWkCrg_u3 9Fgws7Ga1xuF4Dta1xKFyrZF1xtFW5JrW5Aa18KF4xKry5ZF13GF4vkr9a9as7Gayktrn8 uw13Zw1vk3sFvjkaLaAFLSUrUUUUjb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUvcSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7xRR8u45UUUUU== X-CM-SenderInfo: 5mdfy55bjdzsisqqiqqrwthudrp/1tbiSBMmKWXAmcpbkgACsp > 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