public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>
To: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next v3 0/4] fixed-buffer for uring-cmd/passthrough
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 00:16:08 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220902184608.GA6902@test-zns> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3444 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 10:32:16AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>On 9/2/22 10:06 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 9/2/22 9:16 AM, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Currently uring-cmd lacks the ability to leverage the pre-registered
>>> buffers. This series adds the support in uring-cmd, and plumbs
>>> nvme passthrough to work with it.
>>>
>>> Using registered-buffers showed peak-perf hike from 1.85M to 2.17M IOPS
>>> in my setup.
>>>
>>> Without fixedbufs
>>> *****************
>>> # taskset -c 0 t/io_uring -b512 -d128 -c32 -s32 -p0 -F1 -B0 -O0 -n1 -u1 /dev/ng0n1
>>> submitter=0, tid=5256, file=/dev/ng0n1, node=-1
>>> polled=0, fixedbufs=0/0, register_files=1, buffered=1, QD=128
>>> Engine=io_uring, sq_ring=128, cq_ring=128
>>> IOPS=1.85M, BW=904MiB/s, IOS/call=32/31
>>> IOPS=1.85M, BW=903MiB/s, IOS/call=32/32
>>> IOPS=1.85M, BW=902MiB/s, IOS/call=32/32
>>> ^CExiting on signal
>>> Maximum IOPS=1.85M
>>
>> With the poll support queued up, I ran this one as well. tldr is:
>>
>> bdev (non pt)	122M IOPS
>> irq driven	51-52M IOPS
>> polled		71M IOPS
>> polled+fixed	78M IOPS

except first one, rest three entries are for passthru? somehow I didn't
see that big of a gap. I will try to align my setup in coming days.

>> Looking at profiles, it looks like the bio is still being allocated
>> and freed and not dipping into the alloc cache, which is using a
>> substantial amount of CPU. I'll poke a bit and see what's going on...
>
>It's using the fs_bio_set, and that doesn't have the PERCPU alloc cache
>enabled. With the below, we then do:

Thanks for the find.

>polled+fixed	82M
>
>I suspect the remainder is due to the lack of batching on the request
>freeing side, at least some of it. Haven't really looked deeper yet.
>
>One issue I saw - try and use passthrough polling without having any
>poll queues defined and it'll stall just spinning on completions. You
>need to ensure that these are processed as well - look at how the
>non-passthrough io_uring poll path handles it.

Had tested this earlier, and it used to run fine. And it does not now.
I see that io are getting completed, irq-completion is arriving in nvme
and it is triggering task-work based completion (by calling
io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task). But task-work never got called and
therefore no completion happened.

io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task -> io_req_task_work_add -> __io_req_task_work_add

Seems task work did not get added. Something about newly added
IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN changes the scenario.

static inline void __io_req_task_work_add(struct io_kiocb *req, bool allow_local)
{
        struct io_uring_task *tctx = req->task->io_uring;
        struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = req->ctx;
        struct llist_node *node;

        if (allow_local && ctx->flags & IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN) {
                io_req_local_work_add(req);
                return;
        }
	....

To confirm, I commented that in t/io_uring and it runs fine.
Please see if that changes anything for you? I will try to find the
actual fix tomorow.

diff --git a/t/io_uring.c b/t/io_uring.c
index d893b7b2..ac5f60e0 100644
--- a/t/io_uring.c
+++ b/t/io_uring.c
@@ -460,7 +460,6 @@ static int io_uring_setup(unsigned entries, struct io_uring_params *p)

        p->flags |= IORING_SETUP_COOP_TASKRUN;
        p->flags |= IORING_SETUP_SINGLE_ISSUER;
-       p->flags |= IORING_SETUP_DEFER_TASKRUN;
 retry:
        ret = syscall(__NR_io_uring_setup, entries, p);
        if (!ret)



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]



  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-02 18:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20220902152701epcas5p1d4aca8eebc90fb96ac7ed5a8270816cf@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2022-09-02 15:16 ` [PATCH for-next v3 0/4] fixed-buffer for uring-cmd/passthrough Kanchan Joshi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20220902152706epcas5p11f1a11710a6ba985f4679a5cfe131bf8@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2022-09-02 15:16     ` [PATCH for-next v3 1/4] io_uring: introduce io_uring_cmd_import_fixed Kanchan Joshi
     [not found]   ` <CGME20220902152709epcas5p1a1bd433cac6040c492e347edae484ca5@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2022-09-02 15:16     ` [PATCH for-next v3 2/4] io_uring: introduce fixed buffer support for io_uring_cmd Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-02 23:13       ` Jens Axboe
     [not found]   ` <CGME20220902152712epcas5p2622e861ac4a5ae9820a9af9442d556b4@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2022-09-02 15:16     ` [PATCH for-next v3 3/4] block: add helper to map bvec iterator for passthrough Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-02 23:14       ` Jens Axboe
     [not found]   ` <CGME20220902152717epcas5p26905ce7cb48e9d278976a301d73c297f@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2022-09-02 15:16     ` [PATCH for-next v3 4/4] nvme: wire up fixed buffer support for nvme passthrough Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-02 16:06   ` [PATCH for-next v3 0/4] fixed-buffer for uring-cmd/passthrough Jens Axboe
2022-09-02 16:32     ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-02 18:46       ` Kanchan Joshi [this message]
2022-09-02 19:32         ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-02 21:25           ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-03  9:34             ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-03 17:00             ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-04 17:01               ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-04 20:17                 ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-05  5:52                   ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-09-05 17:48                     ` Jens Axboe

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=20220902184608.GA6902@test-zns \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    [email protected] \
    /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
Be 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