mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
To: stuart hayes <stuart.w.hayes@gmail.com>,
	Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>,
	Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme_core: scan namespaces asynchronously
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:15:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c4d77e9-922f-4cb4-b3d8-1c2c49fdcf4c@grimberg.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54b5e83b-4b08-4c5e-afec-1c672561fa81@gmail.com>



On 1/16/24 21:14, stuart hayes wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/12/2024 1:36 PM, stuart hayes wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/01/2024 18:47, Keith Busch wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 10:38:26AM -0600, Stuart Hayes wrote:
>>>>> Currently NVME namespaces are scanned serially, so it can take a 
>>>>> long time
>>>>> for all of a controller's namespaces to become available, 
>>>>> especially with a
>>>>> slower (fabrics) interface with large number (~1000) of namespaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> Use async function calls to make namespace scanning happen in 
>>>>> parallel,
>>>>> and add a (boolean) module parameter "async_ns_scan" to enable this.
>>>>
>>>> Hm, we're not doing a whole lot of blocking IO to bring up a namespace,
>>>> so I'm a little surprised it makes a noticable difference. How much 
>>>> time
>>>> improvement are you observing by parallelizing the scan? Is there a
>>>> tipping point in Number of Namespaces where inline scanning is better
>>>> than asynchronous? And if it is a meaningful gain, let's not introduce
>>>> another module parameter to disable it.
>>>
>>> I don't think it is a good idea since some of the namespace 
>>> characteristics must be validated during re-connection time for example.
>>> I actually prepared a patch that makes sure we sync the ns scanning 
>>> before kicking the ns blk queue to avoid that situations.
>>> for example, if for some reason ns1 change its uuid then we must 
>>> remove it and open a new bdev instead. We can't kick old request to 
>>> it...
>>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the delayed response--I thought I could get exact data on 
>> how long it takes with and
>> without the patch before I responded, it is taking a while (I'm having 
>> to rely on someone else
>> to do the testing).  I'll respond with the data as soon as I get 
>> it--hopefully it won't be too
>> much longer.  The time it takes to scan namespaces adds up when there 
>> are 1000 namespaces and
>> you have a fabrics controller on a network that isn't too fast.
>>
>> I don't expect there would be any reason to disable this.  I only put 
>> the module parameter to
>> disable it in case there was some unforeseen issue, but I can remove 
>> that.
>>
>> To Max Gurtovoy--this patch wouldn't change when or how namespaces are 
>> validated... it just
>> puts the actual scan work function on a workqueue so the scans can 
>> happen in parallel.  It will
>> do the same work to scan, at the same point, and it will wait for all 
>> the scanning to finish
>> before proceeding.  I don't understand how this patch would make the 
>> situation you mention any
>> worse.
>>
> 
> I have numbers for the namespace scan time improvement.  Below is the 
> amount of time it took for
> all of the namespaces to show up when connecting to a controller with 
> 1002 namespaces:
> 
> network latency   time without patch    time with patch
>    0                        6s                 1s
>   50                      210s                10s
> 100                      417s                18s


That is a big improvement. I wouldn't say that 1000+ namespaces
is a common requirement. But the improvement speaks for itself.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-17 14:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-04 16:38 Stuart Hayes
2024-01-04 16:47 ` Keith Busch
2024-01-07  0:40   ` Max Gurtovoy
2024-01-12 19:36     ` stuart hayes
2024-01-16 19:14       ` stuart hayes
2024-01-16 21:20         ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2024-01-17 14:15         ` Sagi Grimberg [this message]
2024-01-04 23:06 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni

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=3c4d77e9-922f-4cb4-b3d8-1c2c49fdcf4c@grimberg.me \
    --to=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mgurtovoy@nvidia.com \
    --cc=stuart.w.hayes@gmail.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®