[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a26e28a6-91e0-e803-749e-2ce957711c64@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 15:49:15 +0800
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>,
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 2023/05/16 23:12, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> On 5/12/23 20:09, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> 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?
>
> I'm afraid that this approach won't help for the UFS driver since it is
> likely that all tags are in use by a single logical unit during an IOPS
> test. Hence, fair sharing would be enabled even when we don't want it to
> be enabled.
It's right my original method is not flexible.
>
> I propose that we switch to one of these two approaches:
How about a smoothing method that the device with more io will share
more tag, and each device will get at least one tag?
Thanks,
Kuai
> * Either remove the fair tag sharing code entirely and rely on the
> fairness mechanism provided by the sbitmap code. I'm referring to how
> __sbitmap_queue_wake_up() uses the wake_index member variable.
> * Or make the behavior of the fairness algorithm configurable from user
> space. One possible approach is to make the proportion of tags for a
> logical unit / NVMe namespace configurable via sysfs. This will allow to
> reduce the number of tags for the WLUN of UFS devices.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists