Re: blk-mq: bitmap tag: performance degradation?

From: Jens Axboe
Date: Thu Jun 05 2014 - 21:56:00 EST


On 2014-06-05 17:33, Ming Lei wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/05/2014 08:16 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2014-06-05 08:01, Alexander Gordeev wrote:

On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 08:18:42AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:

A null_blk test is the absolute best case for percpu_ida, since
there are enough tags and everything is localized. The above test is
more useful for testing blk-mq than any real world application of
the tagging.

I've done considerable testing on both 2 and 4 socket (32 and 64
CPUs) and bitmap tagging is better in a much wider range of
applications. This includes even high tag depth devices like nvme,
and more normal ranges like mtip32xx and scsi-mq setups.


Just for the record: bitmap tags on a 48 CPU box with NVMe device
indeed shows almost the same performance/cache rate as the stock
kernel.


Thanks for confirming. It's one of the dangers of null_blk, it's not always
a very accurate simulation of what a real device will do. I think it's
mostly a completion side thing, would be great with a small device that
supported msi-x and could be used as an irq trigger :-)

Maybe null_blk at IRQ_TIMER mode is more close to
a real device, and I guess the result may be different with
mode IRQ_NONE/IRQ_SOFTIRQ.

It'd be closer in behavior, but the results might then be skewed by
hitting the timer way too hard. And it'd be a general slowdown, again
possibly skewing it. But I haven't tried with the timer completion, to
see if that yields more accurate modelling for this test, so it might
actually be a lot better.

My test on a 16core VM(host: 2 sockets, 16core):

1, bitmap tag allocation(3.15-rc7-next):
- softirq mode: 759K IOPS
- timer mode: 409K IOPS

2, percpu_ida allocation(3.15-rc7)
- softirq mode: 1116K IOPS
- timer mode: 411K IOPS

It's hard to say if this is close, or whether we are just timer bound at that point.

What other parameters did you load null_blk with (unmber of queues, queue depth)?


--
Jens Axboe

--
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/