[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <afb8792b-a78d-4886-bf9a-23121510dec5@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:26:41 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Hazem Mohamed Abuelfotoh <abuehaze@...zon.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
Hagar Hemdan <hagarhem@...zon.com>, Shaoying Xu <shaoyi@...zon.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "block: don't reorder requests in
blk_add_rq_to_plug"
On 6/11/25 9:10 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 12:14:54PM +0000, Hazem Mohamed Abuelfotoh wrote:
>> This reverts commit e70c301faece15b618e54b613b1fd6ece3dd05b4.
>>
>> Commit <e70c301faece> ("block: don't reorder requests in
>> blk_add_rq_to_plug") reversed how requests are stored in the blk_plug
>> list, this had significant impact on bio merging with requests exist on
>> the plug list. This impact has been reported in [1] and could easily be
>> reproducible using 4k randwrite fio benchmark on an NVME based SSD without
>> having any filesystem on the disk.
>>
>> My benchmark is:
>>
>> fio --time_based --name=benchmark --size=50G --rw=randwrite \
>> --runtime=60 --filename="/dev/nvme1n1" --ioengine=psync \
>> --randrepeat=0 --iodepth=1 --fsync=64 --invalidate=1 \
>> --verify=0 --verify_fatal=0 --blocksize=4k --numjobs=4 \
>> --group_reporting
>>
>> On 1.9TiB SSD(180K Max IOPS) attached to i3.16xlarge AWS EC2 instance.
>>
>> Kernel | fio (B.W MiB/sec) | I/O size (iostat)
>> --------------+---------------------+--------------------
>> 6.15.1 | 362 | 2KiB
>> 6.15.1+revert | 660 (+82%) | 4KiB
>> --------------+---------------------+--------------------
>
> I just run one quick test in my test VM, but can't reproduce it.
>
> Also be curious, why does writeback produce so many 2KiB bios?
I was pondering that too, sounds like a misconfiguration of sorts. But
even without that, in a quick synthetic test here locally, I do see a
lot of missed merges that is solved with the alternative patch I sent
out. I strongly suspect it'll fix this issue too.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists