[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] block: Extand commit_rqs() to do batch processing

>>>> You're mostly correct. This is exactly why an I/O scheduler may be
>>>> applicable here IMO. Mostly because I/O schedulers tend to optimize for
>>>> something specific and always present tradeoffs. Users need to
>>>> understand what they are optimizing for.
>>>> Hence I'd say this functionality can definitely be available to an I/O
>>>> scheduler should one exist.
>>> I guess it is just that there can be multiple requests available from
>>> scheduler queue. Actually it can be so for other non-nvme drivers in
>>> case of none, such as SCSI.
>>> Another way is to use one per-task list(such as plug list) to hold the
>>> requests for dispatch, then every drivers may see real .last flag, so they
>>> may get chance for optimizing batch queuing. I will think about the
>>> idea further and see if it is really doable.
>> How about my RFC v1 patch set[1], which allows dispatching more than
>> one request from the scheduler to support batch requests?
>> [1]
> Basically, my idea is to dequeue request one by one, and for each
> dequeued request:
> - we try to get a budget and driver tag, if both succeed, add the
> request to one per-task list which can be stored in stack variable,
> then continue to dequeue more request
> - if either budget or driver tag can't be allocated for this request,
> marks the last request in the per-task list as .last, and send the
> batching requests stored in the list to LLD
> - when queueing batching requests to LLD, if one request isn't queued
> to driver successfully, calling .commit_rqs() like before, meantime
> adding the remained requests in the per-task list back to scheduler
> queue or hctx->dispatch.

Sounds good to me.

> One issue is that this way might degrade sequential IO performance if
> the LLD just tells queue busy to blk-mq via return value of .queue_rq(),
> so I guess we still may need one flag, such as BLK_MQ_F_BATCHING_SUBMISSION.

Why is that degrading sequential I/O performance? because the specific
device will do better without batching submissions? If so, the driver
is not obligated to respect the bd->last/.commit_rqs, so if that is the
case, it should just ignore it.

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-10 09:45    [W:0.059 / U:0.852 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site