From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
To: Ping Gan <jacky_gam_2001@163.com>, 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: Sat, 27 Jul 2024 22:36:13 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3592bca-015f-451e-b689-8db820cbc7a6@grimberg.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240726023407.70799-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com>
On 26/07/2024 5:34, Ping Gan wrote:
>> 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?
What I'm saying is that if you want to change the default, please provide
justification in the form of benchmarks that support the change. This
benchmarks should include both throughput, iops and latency measurements
and without the cpu-set constraints you presented originally.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-27 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-19 9:19 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
2024-07-27 19:36 ` Sagi Grimberg [this message]
2024-07-31 7:03 ` [PATCH " 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=b3592bca-015f-451e-b689-8db820cbc7a6@grimberg.me \
--to=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jacky_gam_2001@163.com \
--cc=kch@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ping.gan@dell.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®