Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_blk: blk-mq support

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 01:17:54PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Let's pretend I'm stupid.
> 
> We don't actually have multiple queues through to the host, but we're
> pretending to, because it makes the block layer go faster?
> 
> Do I want to know *why* it's faster?  Or should I look the other way?

You shouldn't.  To how multiple queues benefit here I'd like to defer to
Jens, given the single workqueue I don't really know where to look here.

The real benefit that unfortunately wasn't obvious from the description
is that even with just a single queue the blk-multiqueue infrastructure
will be a lot faster, because it is designed in a much more streaminline
fashion and avoids lots of lock roundtrips both during submission itself
and for submission vs complettion.  Back when I tried to get virtio-blk
to perform well on high-end flash (the work that Asias took over later)
the queue_lock contention was the major issue in virtio-blk and this
patch gets rid of that even with a single queue.

A good example are the patches from Nick to move scsi drivers over to
the infrastructure that only support a single queue.  Even that gave
over a 10 fold improvement over the old code.

Unfortunately I do not have access to this kind of hardware at the
moment, but I'd love to see if Asias or anyone at Red Hat could redo
those old numbers.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/