From: Olivier Langlois <[email protected]>
To: Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] io_uring: reduce latency by reissueing the operation
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:56:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Thu, 2021-06-10 at 16:51 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Right, but it still stalls other requests and IIRC there are people
> not liking the syscall already taking too long. Consider
> io_req_task_queue(), adds more overhead but will delay execution
> to the syscall exit.
>
> In any case, would be great to have numbers, e.g. to see if
> io_req_task_queue() is good enough, how often your problem
> takes places and how much it gives us.
>
I will get you more more data later but I did run a fast test that
lasted 81 seconds with a single TCP connection.
The # of times that the sqe got reissued is 57.
I'll intrumentalize a bit the code to answer the following questions:
1. What is the ratio of reissued read sqe/total read sqe
2. Average exec time of __io_queue_sqe() for a read sqe when data is
already available vs avg exec time when sqe is reissued
3. average exec time when the sqe is pushed to async when it could have
been reissued.
With that info, I think that we will be in better position to evaluate
whether or not the patch is good or not.
Can you think of other numbers that would be useful to know to evaluate
the patch performance?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-10 17:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <[email protected]>
2021-06-10 9:03 ` [PATCH] io_uring: reduce latency by reissueing the operation Pavel Begunkov
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2021-06-10 15:51 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-10 17:56 ` Olivier Langlois [this message]
2021-06-10 19:32 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-11 3:55 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-17 18:10 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-18 22:45 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-20 20:55 ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-06-20 21:31 ` Olivier Langlois
2021-06-20 22:04 ` Pavel Begunkov
[not found] <[email protected]>
2021-06-16 12:48 ` Jens Axboe
2021-06-18 21:38 ` Olivier Langlois
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=9938f22a0bb09f344fa5c9c5c1b91f0d12e7566f.camel@trillion01.com \
[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