Re: [PATCH 3/3] virtio_blk: implement blk_mq_ops->poll()

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 03:38:42PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 09:22:48AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 24/05/21 16:59, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 03:13:05PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > > Possible drawbacks of this approach:
> > > > 
> > > > - Hardware virtio_blk implementations may find virtqueue_disable_cb()
> > > >    expensive since it requires DMA. If such devices become popular then
> > > >    the virtio_blk driver could use a similar approach to NVMe when
> > > >    VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM is detected in the future.
> > > > 
> > > > - If a blk_poll() thread is descheduled it not only hurts polling
> > > >    performance but also delays completion of non-REQ_HIPRI requests on
> > > >    that virtqueue since vq notifications are disabled.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I think this is a dangerous configuration.  What argument exists
> > > again just using dedicated poll queues?
> > 
> > There isn't an equivalent of the admin queue in virtio-blk, which would
> > allow the guest to configure the desired number of poll queues.  The number
> > of queues is fixed.
> 
> Dedicated vqs can be used for poll only, and I understand VM needn't to know
> if the vq is polled or driven by IRQ in VM.
> 
> I tried that in v5.4, but not see obvious IOPS boost, so give up.
> 
> https://github.com/ming1/linux/commits/my_v5.4-virtio-irq-poll

Hey, that's cool. I see a lot of similarity between our patches :).

Stefan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature