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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <cf7e9e40-dcd3-4bcd-8bf5-fc1d594afae6@kernel.dk> Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 07:35:38 -0600 From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> To: ZhangHui <zhanghui31@...omi.com>, bvanassche@....org, ming.lei@...hat.com, dlemoal@...nel.org Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] block: move non sync requests complete flow to softirq On 9/6/24 3:54 AM, ZhangHui wrote: > From: zhanghui <zhanghui31@...omi.com> > > Currently, for a controller that supports multiple queues, like UFS4.0, > the mq_ops->complete is executed in the interrupt top-half. Therefore, > the file system's end io is executed during the request completion process, > such as f2fs_write_end_io on smartphone. > > However, we found that the execution time of the file system end io > is strongly related to the size of the bio and the processing speed > of the CPU. Because the file system's end io will traverse every page > in bio, this is a very time-consuming operation. > > We measured that the 80M bio write operation on the little CPU will > cause the execution time of the top-half to be greater than 100ms, > which will undoubtedly affect interrupt response latency. > > Let's fix this issue by moving non sync requests completion to softirq > context, and keeping sync requests completion in the IRQ top-half context. Didn't we already conclude that the fix for this would be on the f2fs side? -- Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists