LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org> To: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 09:12:40 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <7DF40BD4-8F57-4C2E-88A9-CBC3DA2A891E@linaro.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210714094529.758808-2-yukuai3@huawei.com> > Il giorno 14 lug 2021, alle ore 11:45, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com> ha scritto: > > 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(). I see your point, and I agree with your goal. Yet, your change seems not to suffer from the following problem. In addition to the groups that are created explicitly, there is the implicit root group. So, when bfqd->num_groups_with_pending_reqs == 1, there may be both active processes in the root group and active processes in the only group created explicitly. In this case, idling is needed to preserve service guarantees. Probably your idea should be improved by making sure that there is pending I/O only from either the root group or the explicit group. Thanks, Paolo > 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 >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-24 7:12 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 ` [PATCH 1/3] block, bfq: do not idle if only one cgroup is activated Yu Kuai 2021-07-24 7:12 ` Paolo Valente [this message] 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=7DF40BD4-8F57-4C2E-88A9-CBC3DA2A891E@linaro.org \ --to=paolo.valente@linaro.org \ --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \ --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \ --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).