[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1c643ef1-26d8-3fa4-2b65-7e299e6a5ceb@kernel.dk>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 09:39:21 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
Tom Nguyen <tom81094@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Omar Sandoval <osandov@...com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 0/8] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance
On 10/14/2017 03:22 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Jens,
>
> In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we found that I/O
> performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially about sequential I/O
> on some multi-queue SCSI devcies(lpfc, qla2xxx, SRP...)
>
> Turns out one big issue causes the performance regression: requests are
> still dequeued from sw queue/scheduler queue even when ldd's queue is
> busy, so I/O merge becomes quite difficult to make, then sequential IO
> performance degrades a lot.
>
> This issue becomes one of mains reasons for reverting default SCSI_MQ
> in V4.13.
>
> This 8 patches improve this situation, and brings back performance loss.
>
> With this change, SCSI-MQ sequential I/O performance is improved much, Paolo
> reported that mq-deadline performance improved much[2] in his dbench test
> wrt V2. Also performance improvement on lpfc/qla2xx was observed with V1.[1]
Looks good to me, and the kyber fix looks obviously correct to me. I have
applied this series for 4.15. Thanks Ming.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists