[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <de3f41a0-b13d-d4f6-765a-19b857bce53e@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2023 11:09:31 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Ed Tsai <ed.tsai@...iatek.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
stanley.chu@...iatek.com, peter.wang@...iatek.com,
chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com, alice.chao@...iatek.com,
powen.kao@...iatek.com, naomi.chu@...iatek.com,
wsd_upstream@...iatek.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ufs: don't use the fair tag sharings
Hi,
在 2023/05/13 2:12, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> The fair tag sharing algorithm has a negative impact on all SCSI devices
> with multiple logical units. This is because logical units are
> considered active until (request timeout) seconds have elapsed after the
> logical unit stopped being used (see also the blk_mq_tag_idle() call in
> blk_mq_timeout_work()). UFS users are hit by this because UFS 3.0
> devices have a limited queue depth (32) and because power management
> commands are submitted to a logical unit (WLUN). Hence, it happens often
> that the block layer "active queue" counter is equal to 2 while only one
> logical unit is being used actively (a logical unit backed by NAND
> flash). The performance difference between queue depths 16 and 32 for
> UFS devices is significant.
We meet similiar problem before, but I think remove tag fair sharing
might cause some problems, because get tag is not fair currently, for
example 2 devices share 32 tag, while device a issue large amount of
io concurrently, and device b only issue one io, in this case, if fair
tag sharing is removed, device b can get bad io latency.
By the way, I tried to propose a way to workaround this by following:
1) disable fair tag sharing untill get tag found no tag is avaiable;
2) enable fair tag sharing again if the disk donesn't faild to get tag
for a period of time;
Can this approch be considered?
Thanks,
Kuai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists