From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@infradead.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>, <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>,
"Laurence Oberman" <loberman@redhat.com>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>,
Tom Nguyen <tom81094@gmail.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:10:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e31eefb6-56ed-d75b-f52e-641beb09d203@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171010134519.GA20770@ming.t460p>
On 10/10/2017 14:45, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> All change in V6.2 is blk-mq/scsi-mq only, which shouldn't
> affect non SCSI_MQ, so I suggest you to compare the perf
> between deadline and mq-deadline, like Johannes mentioned.
>
>> >
>> > V6.2 series with default SCSI_MQ
>> > read, rw, write IOPS
>> > 700K, 130K/128K, 640K
> If possible, could you provide your fio script and log on both
> non SCSI_MQ(deadline) and SCSI_MQ(mq_deadline)? Maybe some clues
> can be figured out.
>
> Also, I just put another patch on V6.2 branch, which may improve
> a bit too. You may try that in your test.
>
> https://github.com/ming1/linux/commit/e31e2eec46c9b5ae7cfa181e9b77adad2c6a97ce
>
> -- Ming .
Hi Ming Lei,
OK, I have tested deadline vs mq-deadline for your v6.2 branch and
4.12-rc2. Unfortunately I don't have time now to test your experimental
patches.
4.14-rc2 without default SCSI_MQ, deadline scheduler
read, rw, write IOPS
920K, 115K/115K, 806K
4.14-rc2 with default SCSI_MQ, mq-deadline scheduler
read, rw, write IOPS
280K, 99K/99K, 300K
V6.2 series without default SCSI_MQ, deadline scheduler
read, rw, write IOPS
919K, 117K/117K, 806K
V6.2 series with default SCSI_MQ, mq-deadline scheduler
read, rw, write IOPS
688K, 128K/128K, 630K
I think that the non-mq results look a bit more sensible - that is,
consistent results.
Here's my script sample:
[global]
rw=rW
direct=1
ioengine=libaio
iodepth=2048
numjobs=1
bs=4k
;size=10240000m
;zero_buffers=1
group_reporting=1
group_reporting=1
;ioscheduler=noop
cpumask=0xff
;cpus_allowed=0-3
;gtod_reduce=1
;iodepth_batch=2
;iodepth_batch_complete=2
runtime=100000000
;thread
loops = 10000
[job1]
filename=/dev/sdb:
[job1]
filename=/dev/sdc:
[job1]
filename=/dev/sdd:
[job1]
filename=/dev/sde:
[job1]
filename=/dev/sdf:
[job1]
filename=/dev/sdg:
John
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-10 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-30 10:27 Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 1/7] blk-mq: issue rq directly in blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() Ming Lei
2017-10-03 8:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-03 13:39 ` Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 2/7] blk-mq-sched: fix scheduler bad performance Ming Lei
2017-10-02 14:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 3/7] sbitmap: introduce __sbitmap_for_each_set() Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 4/7] blk-mq: introduce blk_mq_dequeue_from_ctx() Ming Lei
2017-10-03 9:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-09 4:36 ` Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 5/7] blk-mq-sched: move actual dispatching into one helper Ming Lei
2017-10-02 14:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-09 9:07 ` Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 6/7] blk-mq-sched: improve dispatching from sw queue Ming Lei
2017-10-03 9:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-09 10:15 ` Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:27 ` [PATCH V5 7/7] blk-mq-sched: don't dequeue request until all in ->dispatch are flushed Ming Lei
2017-10-03 9:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-10-09 10:40 ` Ming Lei
2017-09-30 10:32 ` [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1) Ming Lei
2017-10-09 12:09 ` John Garry
2017-10-09 15:04 ` Ming Lei
2017-10-10 1:46 ` Ming Lei
2017-10-10 12:24 ` John Garry
2017-10-10 12:34 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2017-10-10 12:37 ` Paolo Valente
2017-10-10 13:45 ` Ming Lei
2017-10-10 15:10 ` John Garry [this message]
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=e31eefb6-56ed-d75b-f52e-641beb09d203@huawei.com \
--to=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=loberman@redhat.com \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
--cc=osandov@fb.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=tom81094@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®