[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190613075700.105303320@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 10:34:03 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Holger Hoffstätte
<holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.1 131/155] block, bfq: increase idling for weight-raised queues
[ Upstream commit 778c02a236a8728bb992de10ed1f12c0be5b7b0e ]
If a sync bfq_queue has a higher weight than some other queue, and
remains temporarily empty while in service, then, to preserve the
bandwidth share of the queue, it is necessary to plug I/O dispatching
until a new request arrives for the queue. In addition, a timeout
needs to be set, to avoid waiting for ever if the process associated
with the queue has actually finished its I/O.
Even with the above timeout, the device is however not fed with new
I/O for a while, if the process has finished its I/O. If this happens
often, then throughput drops and latencies grow. For this reason, the
timeout is kept rather low: 8 ms is the current default.
Unfortunately, such a low value may cause, on the opposite end, a
violation of bandwidth guarantees for a process that happens to issue
new I/O too late. The higher the system load, the higher the
probability that this happens to some process. This is a problem in
scenarios where service guarantees matter more than throughput. One
important case are weight-raised queues, which need to be granted a
very high fraction of the bandwidth.
To address this issue, this commit lower-bounds the plugging timeout
for weight-raised queues to 20 ms. This simple change provides
relevant benefits. For example, on a PLEXTOR PX-256M5S, with which
gnome-terminal starts in 0.6 seconds if there is no other I/O in
progress, the same applications starts in
- 0.8 seconds, instead of 1.2 seconds, if ten files are being read
sequentially in parallel
- 1 second, instead of 2 seconds, if, in parallel, five files are
being read sequentially, and five more files are being written
sequentially
Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>
Tested-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
block/bfq-iosched.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 5ba1e0d841b4..679d608347ea 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -2545,6 +2545,8 @@ static void bfq_arm_slice_timer(struct bfq_data *bfqd)
if (BFQQ_SEEKY(bfqq) && bfqq->wr_coeff == 1 &&
bfq_symmetric_scenario(bfqd))
sl = min_t(u64, sl, BFQ_MIN_TT);
+ else if (bfqq->wr_coeff > 1)
+ sl = max_t(u32, sl, 20ULL * NSEC_PER_MSEC);
bfqd->last_idling_start = ktime_get();
hrtimer_start(&bfqd->idle_slice_timer, ns_to_ktime(sl),
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists