LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
To: <paolo.valente@linaro.org>, <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<yukuai3@huawei.com>, <yi.zhang@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 17:45:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210714094529.758808-2-yukuai3@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210714094529.758808-1-yukuai3@huawei.com>

If only one group is activated, specifically
'bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs == 1', there is no need to guarantee
the same share of the throughput of queues in the same group.

Thus change the condition from '> 0' to '> 1' in
bfq_asymmetric_scenario(). By the way, if 'num_groups_with_pending_reqs'
is greater than 1, there is no need to check 'varied_queue_weights' and
'multiple_classes_busy', thus move the judgement forward.

Test procedure:
run "fio -numjobs=1 -ioengine=psync -bs=4k -direct=1 -rw=randread..." multiple
times in the same cgroup(not root).

Test result: total bandwidth(Mib/s)
| total jobs | before this patch | after this patch      |
| ---------- | ----------------- | --------------------- |
| 1          | 33.8              | 33.8                  |
| 2          | 33.8              | 65.4 (32.7 each job)  |
| 4          | 33.8              | 106.8 (26.7 each job) |
| 8          | 33.8              | 126.4 (15.8 each job) |

By the way, if I test with "fio -numjobs=1/2/4/8 ...", test result is
the same with or without this patch.

Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
---
 block/bfq-iosched.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 727955918563..2768a4c1cc45 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -709,7 +709,9 @@ bfq_pos_tree_add_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
  * much easier to maintain the needed state:
  * 1) all active queues have the same weight,
  * 2) all active queues belong to the same I/O-priority class,
- * 3) there are no active groups.
+ * 3) there is one active group at most.
+ * If the last condition is false, there is no need to guarantee the
+ * same share of the throughput of queues in the same group.
  * In particular, the last condition is always true if hierarchical
  * support or the cgroups interface are not enabled, thus no state
  * needs to be maintained in this case.
@@ -717,7 +719,16 @@ bfq_pos_tree_add_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
 static bool bfq_asymmetric_scenario(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
 				   struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
 {
-	bool smallest_weight = bfqq &&
+	bool smallest_weight;
+	bool varied_queue_weights;
+	bool multiple_classes_busy;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
+	if (bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs > 1)
+		return true;
+#endif
+
+	smallest_weight = bfqq &&
 		bfqq->weight_counter &&
 		bfqq->weight_counter ==
 		container_of(
@@ -729,21 +740,17 @@ static bool bfq_asymmetric_scenario(struct bfq_data *bfqd,
 	 * For queue weights to differ, queue_weights_tree must contain
 	 * at least two nodes.
 	 */
-	bool varied_queue_weights = !smallest_weight &&
+	varied_queue_weights = !smallest_weight &&
 		!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqd->queue_weights_tree.rb_root) &&
 		(bfqd->queue_weights_tree.rb_root.rb_node->rb_left ||
 		 bfqd->queue_weights_tree.rb_root.rb_node->rb_right);
 
-	bool multiple_classes_busy =
+	multiple_classes_busy =
 		(bfqd->busy_queues[0] && bfqd->busy_queues[1]) ||
 		(bfqd->busy_queues[0] && bfqd->busy_queues[2]) ||
 		(bfqd->busy_queues[1] && bfqd->busy_queues[2]);
 
-	return varied_queue_weights || multiple_classes_busy
-#ifdef CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED
-	       || bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs > 0
-#endif
-		;
+	return varied_queue_weights || multiple_classes_busy;
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.31.1


  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-14  9:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-14  9:45 [PATCH 0/3] optimize the queue idle judgment Yu Kuai
2021-07-14  9:45 ` Yu Kuai [this message]
2021-07-24  7:12   ` [PATCH 1/3] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated Paolo Valente
2021-07-26  1:15     ` yukuai (C)
2021-07-31  7:10     ` yukuai (C)
2021-08-03  7:07       ` Paolo Valente
2021-08-03 11:30         ` yukuai (C)
2021-07-14  9:45 ` [PATCH 2/3] block, bfq: add support to record request size information Yu Kuai
2021-07-14  9:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] block, bfq: consider request size in bfq_asymmetric_scenario() Yu Kuai
2021-07-20 12:33 ` [PATCH 0/3] optimize the queue idle judgment yukuai (C)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210714094529.758808-2-yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --to=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/3] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).