From: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
To: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>,
axboe@kernel.dk, bvanassche@acm.org,
andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, john.garry@huawei.com,
ming.lei@redhat.com, qiulaibin@huawei.com
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yi.zhang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next RFC v3 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 20:20:15 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <88d9e8f4-cc5a-4897-f511-8f5b7d9a0acd@opensource.wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35f18afa-0db1-b423-5824-4d5631b0422f@huawei.com>
On 4/25/22 16:28, yukuai (C) wrote:
> 在 2022/04/25 15:06, Damien Le Moal 写道:
>
>>>> By the way, did you check that doing something like:
>>>>
>>>> echo 2048 > /sys/block/sdX/queue/nr_requests
>>>>
>>>> improves performance for your high number of jobs test case ?
>>>
>>> Yes, performance will not degrade when numjobs is not greater than 256
>>> in this case.
>>
>> That is my thinking as well. I am asking if did check that (did you run it ?).
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm sure I ran it with 256 jobs before.
>
> However, I didn't run it with 512 jobs. And following is the result I
> just tested:
What was nr_requests ? The default 64 ?
If you increase that number, do you see better throughput/more requests
being sequential ?
>
> ratio of sequential io: 49.1%
>
> Read|Write seek
>
> cnt 99338, zero cnt 48753
>
> >=(KB) .. <(KB) : count ratio |distribution
> |
> 0 .. 1 : 48753 49.1%
> |########################################|
> 1 .. 2 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 2 .. 4 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 4 .. 8 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 8 .. 16 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 16 .. 32 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 32 .. 64 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 64 .. 128 : 4975 5.0% |#####
> |
> 128 .. 256 : 4439 4.5% |####
> |
> 256 .. 512 : 2615 2.6% |###
> |
> 512 .. 1024 : 967 1.0% |#
> |
> 1024 .. 2048 : 213 0.2% |#
> |
> 2048 .. 4096 : 375 0.4% |#
> |
> 4096 .. 8192 : 723 0.7% |#
> |
> 8192 .. 16384 : 1436 1.4% |##
> |
> 16384 .. 32768 : 2626 2.6% |###
> |
> 32768 .. 65536 : 4197 4.2% |####
> |
> 65536 .. 131072 : 6431 6.5% |######
> |
> 131072 .. 262144 : 7590 7.6% |#######
> |
> 262144 .. 524288 : 6433 6.5% |######
> |
> 524288 .. 1048576 : 4583 4.6% |####
> |
> 1048576 .. 2097152 : 2237 2.3% |##
> |
> 2097152 .. 4194304 : 489 0.5% |#
> |
> 4194304 .. 8388608 : 83 0.1% |#
> |
> 8388608 .. 16777216 : 36 0.0% |#
> |
> 16777216 .. 33554432 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 33554432 .. 67108864 : 0 0.0% |
> |
> 67108864 .. 134217728 : 137 0.1% |#
> |
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-25 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-15 10:10 Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 1/8] sbitmap: record the number of waiters for each waitqueue Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 2/8] blk-mq: call 'bt_wait_ptr()' later in blk_mq_get_tag() Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 3/8] sbitmap: make sure waitqueues are balanced Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 4/8] blk-mq: don't preempt tag under heavy load Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 5/8] sbitmap: force tag preemption if free tags are sufficient Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 6/8] blk-mq: force tag preemption for split bios Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 7/8] blk-mq: record how many tags are needed for splited bio Yu Kuai
2022-04-15 10:10 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 8/8] sbitmap: wake up the number of threads based on required tags Yu Kuai
2022-04-24 2:43 ` [PATCH -next RFC v3 0/8] improve tag allocation under heavy load yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 3:24 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-04-25 6:14 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 6:23 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-04-25 6:47 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 6:50 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-04-25 7:05 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 7:06 ` Damien Le Moal
2022-04-25 7:28 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 11:20 ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2022-04-25 13:42 ` yukuai (C)
2022-04-25 3:09 ` Bart Van Assche
2022-04-25 3:27 ` yukuai (C)
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=88d9e8f4-cc5a-4897-f511-8f5b7d9a0acd@opensource.wdc.com \
--to=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=qiulaibin@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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®