From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>,
axboe@kernel.dk, akpm@linux-foundation.org, yang.yang@vivo.com,
ming.lei@redhat.com, osandov@fb.com, paolo.valente@linaro.org
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com,
"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] block/mq-deadline: Revert "block/mq-deadline: Fix the tag reservation code"
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:33:31 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9733af5-b16b-4644-9d6d-84fbacf334e0@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7081765f-28d7-f594-1221-6034b9e88899@huaweicloud.com>
On 12/9/24 10:22 PM, Yu Kuai wrote:
> First of all, are we in the agreement that it's not acceptable to
> sacrifice performance in the default scenario just to make sure
> functional correctness if async_depth is set to 1?
How much does this affect performance? If this affects performance
significantly I agree that this needs to be fixed.
> If so, following are the options that I can think of to fix this:
>
> 1) make async_depth read-only, if 75% tags will hurt performance in some
> cases, user can increase nr_requests to prevent it.
> 2) refactor elevator sysfs api, remove eq->sysfs_lock and replace it
> with q->sysfs_lock, so deadline_async_depth_store() will be protected
> against changing hctxs, and min_shallow_depth can be updated here.
> 3) other options?
Another option is to remove the ability to configure async_depth. If it
is too much trouble to get the implementation right without causing
regressions for existing workloads, one possibility is to remove support
for restricting the number of asynchronous requests in flight.
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-10 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-09 11:55 [PATCH RFC 0/3] lib/sbitmap: fix shallow_depth tag allocation Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 11:55 ` [PATCH RFC 1/3] block/mq-deadline: Revert "block/mq-deadline: Fix the tag reservation code" Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 18:02 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-10 1:23 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-10 1:50 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-10 6:22 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-10 20:33 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2024-12-11 2:38 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-12-11 2:57 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-11 3:03 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-12-11 3:00 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-14 2:44 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 11:55 ` [PATCH RFC 2/3] lib/sbitmap: don't export sbitmap_get_shallow() Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 18:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-10 2:54 ` Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 11:55 ` [PATCH RFC 3/3] lib/sbitmap: fix shallow_depth tag allocation Yu Kuai
2024-12-09 18:11 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-10 1:28 ` Yu Kuai
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=d9733af5-b16b-4644-9d6d-84fbacf334e0@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=osandov@fb.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=yang.yang@vivo.com \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.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®