linux-kernel - Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b082ed3f-e2de-450f-acc6-9508d7689290@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 06:57:55 -0700
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lkp@...ts.01.org" <lkp@...ts.01.org>,
        "lkp@...el.com" <lkp@...el.com>,
        "ying.huang@...el.com" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        "feng.tang@...el.com" <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        "zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com" <zhengjun.xing@...ux.intel.com>,
        "fengwei.yin@...el.com" <fengwei.yin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec -15.0%
 regression

On 2022/08/09 8:16, David Laight wrote:
> ...
>>>> Without knowing what the device adapter is, hard to say where the problem is. I
>>>> suspect that with the patch applied, we may be ending up with a small default
>>>> max_sectors value, causing overhead due to more commands than necessary.
>>>>
>>>> Will check what I see with my test rig.
>>>
>>> As far as I can see, this patch should not make a difference unless the
>>> ATA shost driver is setting the max_sectors value unnecessarily low.
>>
>> That is my hunch too, hence my question about which host driver is being used
>> for this test... That is not apparent from the problem report.
> 
> No one's fallen over the old problem and managed to limit
> the number of sectors in a read to the number of sectors
> in (IIRC) a 'multi sector' read that uses a single DMA burst?
> 
> Was always a good way of killing disk performance.
> 
> IIRC the maximum number of sectors for an ATA disk transfer is 255.

That is for super old pata/ide devices. Modern SATA/AHCI disks can do a lot more
than that with NCQ/DMA. The default max_sectors_kb for AHCI connected devices is
1280 KB = 2560 sectors, max_segments = 168 and max_segment_size = 65536 B, which
gives a reliable command size of at least 168 * 4096 = 688128 B (1344 sectors)
with 4KB page size architectures.

> 
> 	David
> 
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research