public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Dietrich <[email protected]>
To: Hao Xu <[email protected]>, Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], Joseph Qi <[email protected]>,
	[email protected],
	"Franz-B. Tuneke" <[email protected]>,
	Hendrik Sieck <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [POC RFC 0/3] support graph like dependent sqes
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 11:06:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

Hi everyone!

We experimented with the BPF patchset provided by Pavel a few months
ago. And I had the exact same question: How can we compare the benefits
and drawbacks of a more flexible io_uring implementation? In that
specific use case, I wanted to show that a flexible SQE-dependency
generation with BPF could outperform user-space SQE scheduling. From my
experience with BPF, I learned that it is quite hard to beat
io_uring+userspace, if there is enough parallelism in your IO jobs.

For this purpose, I've built a benchmark generator that is able to
produce random dependency graphs of various shapes (isolated nodes,
binary tree, parallel-dependency chains, random DAC) and different
scheduling backends (usual system-call backend, plain io_uring,
BPF-enhanced io_uring) and different workloads.

At this point, I didn't have the time to polish the generator and
publish it, but I put the current state into this git:

https://collaborating.tuhh.de/e-exk4/projects/syscall-graph-generator

After running:

    ./generate.sh
    [sudo modprobe null_blk...]
    ./run.sh
    ./analyze.py

You get the following results (at least if you own my machine):

generator              iouring      syscall      iouring_norm
graph action size
chain read   128    938.563366  2019.199010   46.48%
flat  read   128    922.132673  2011.566337   45.84%
graph read   128   1129.017822  2021.905941   55.84%
rope  read   128   2051.763366  2014.563366  101.85%
tree  read   128   1049.427723  2015.254455   52.07%

For the userspace scheduler, I perform an offline analysis that finds
linear chains of operations that are not (anymore) dependent on other previous
unfinished results. These linear chains are then pushed into io_uring
with a SQE-link chain.

As I'm highly interested in this topic of pushing complex
IO-dependencies into the kernel space, I would be delighted to see how
your SQE-graph extension would compare against my rudimentary userspace
scheduler.

@Hao: Do you have a specific use case for your graph-like dependencies
      in mind? If you need assistance with the generator, please feel
      free to contact me.

chris
-- 
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Christian Dietrich
Operating System Group (E-EXK4)
Technische Universität Hamburg
Am Schwarzenberg-Campus 3 (E), 4.092
21073 Hamburg

eMail:  [email protected]
Tel:    +49 40 42878 2188
WWW:    https://osg.tuhh.de/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-12-23 10:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-14  5:57 [POC RFC 0/3] support graph like dependent sqes Hao Xu
2021-12-14  5:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] io_uring: add data structure for graph sqe feature Hao Xu
2021-12-14  5:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] io_uring: implement new sqe opcode to build graph like links Hao Xu
2021-12-14  5:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] io_uring: implement logic of IOSQE_GRAPH request Hao Xu
2021-12-14 15:21 ` [POC RFC 0/3] support graph like dependent sqes Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-14 16:53   ` Hao Xu
2021-12-14 18:16     ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-16 16:55       ` Hao Xu
2021-12-17 19:33         ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-18  6:57           ` Hao Xu
2021-12-21 16:19             ` Pavel Begunkov
2021-12-23  4:14               ` Hao Xu
2021-12-23 10:06 ` Christian Dietrich [this message]
2021-12-27  3:27   ` Hao Xu
2021-12-27  5:49     ` Christian Dietrich

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 \
    [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