From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Qiliang Yuan <qiliang.yuan@linux.dev>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>,
Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] block: return early when the elevator doesn't change
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 06:05:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <avXHj1CXuNzXC8Ye@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261111-bug-block-elevator-unchanged-v1-2-583198bd4e21@linux.dev>
On Wed, Nov 11, 2026 at 10:00:59PM -0500, Qiliang Yuan wrote:
> Writing the scheduler a queue already uses to queue/scheduler used to
> be a no-op. elevator_change() now only checks for an unchanged elevator
> after freezing the queue, and doesn't treat "none" on a queue without
> an elevator as unchanged at all, so that case also quiesces the queue
> in elevator_switch() and resets nr_requests.
>
> Every such write therefore drains in-flight I/O and waits for an RCU
> grace period. udev rules and tuning tools that set the scheduler
> unconditionally stall I/O on live disks each time they run.
>
> Check under elevator_lock whether anything would change before
> allocating scheduler resources and freezing the queue. Elevator changes
> of a queue are already serialized by QUEUE_FLAG_NO_ELV_SWITCH,
> registration and update_nr_hwq_lock, so drop the check under the freeze.
>
> Writing the current scheduler to queue/scheduler of a null_blk disk 20
> times takes (median):
>
> operation before (ms) after (ms) change
> none -> none 9.06 0.08 -99%
> mq-deadline -> mq-deadline 9.14 0.08 -99%
>
> 4k random reads at queue depth 1 for 10 seconds, while "none" is
> written to queue/scheduler every 50 ms:
>
> metric before after change
> IOPS 342609 395915 +16%
> max latency (us) 10839 978 -91%
>
> Fixes: b07a889e83355 ("block: move q->sysfs_lock and queue-freeze under show/store method")
> Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <qiliang.yuan@linux.dev>
> ---
> block/elevator.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
> index 9d9b2e84a1288..979203f518ada 100644
> --- a/block/elevator.c
> +++ b/block/elevator.c
> @@ -654,10 +654,24 @@ static int elevator_change(struct request_queue *q, struct elv_change_ctx *ctx)
> {
> unsigned int memflags;
> struct blk_mq_tag_set *set = q->tag_set;
> + bool unchanged;
> int ret = 0;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&set->update_nr_hwq_lock);
>
> + /*
> + * Callers serialize elevator changes of this queue, so q->elevator is
> + * stable here. Skip freezing the queue if nothing would change.
> + */
> + mutex_lock(&q->elevator_lock);
> + if (q->elevator)
> + unchanged = elevator_match(q->elevator->type, ctx->name);
> + else
> + unchanged = !strncmp(ctx->name, "none", 4);
> + mutex_unlock(&q->elevator_lock);
> + if (unchanged)
> + return 0;
Strictly speaking this is racy with another thread changing the
elevator. I don't think we actually care about that, but maybe
add a comment to that effect?
> +
> if (strncmp(ctx->name, "none", 4)) {
> ret = blk_mq_alloc_sched_res(q, ctx->type, &ctx->res,
> set->nr_hw_queues);
> @@ -677,8 +691,7 @@ static int elevator_change(struct request_queue *q, struct elv_change_ctx *ctx)
> */
> blk_mq_cancel_work_sync(q);
> mutex_lock(&q->elevator_lock);
> - if (!(q->elevator && elevator_match(q->elevator->type, ctx->name)))
> - ret = elevator_switch(q, ctx);
> + ret = elevator_switch(q, ctx);
However, the raciness means we still need to keep this check I think.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-12 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-12 3:00 [PATCH 0/2] block: make rewriting the current I/O scheduler cheap again Qiliang Yuan
2026-11-12 3:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] block: don't request a module for the none elevator Qiliang Yuan
2026-11-12 14:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-11-12 3:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] block: return early when the elevator doesn't change Qiliang Yuan
2026-11-12 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-11-12 14:03 ` [PATCH 0/2] block: make rewriting the current I/O scheduler cheap again Christoph Hellwig
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=avXHj1CXuNzXC8Ye@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qiliang.yuan@linux.dev \
--cc=tom.leiming@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®