[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZUg+EfA8b/j5XTD7@fedora>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 09:14:57 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Andrew Theurer <atheurer@...hat.com>,
Joe Mario <jmario@...hat.com>,
Sebastian Jug <sejug@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, ming.lei@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] blk-mq: don't schedule block kworker on isolated CPUs
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 10:57:37AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> Kernel parameter of `isolcpus=` or 'nohz_full=' are used for isolating CPUs
> for specific task, and user often won't want block IO to disturb these CPUs,
> also long IO latency may be caused if blk-mq kworker is scheduled on these
> isolated CPUs.
>
> Kernel workqueue only respects this limit for WQ_UNBOUND, for bound wq,
> the responsibility should be on wq user.
>
> So don't not run block kworker on isolated CPUs by ruling out isolated CPUs
> from hctx->cpumask. Meantime in cpuhp handler, use queue map to check if
> all CPUs in this hw queue are offline, this way can avoid any cost in fast
> IO code path.
>
> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
> Cc: Andrew Theurer <atheurer@...hat.com>
> Cc: Joe Mario <jmario@...hat.com>
> Cc: Sebastian Jug <sejug@...hat.com>
> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
> Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> V3:
> - avoid to check invalid cpu as reported by Bart
> - take current cpu(to be offline, not done yet) into account
> - simplify blk_mq_hctx_has_online_cpu()
Hello Jens and Guys,
Ping...
thanks,
Ming
Powered by blists - more mailing lists