lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: tiobench read 50% regression with 2.6.30-rc1
On Fri, Apr 10 2009, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 11:57 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 09 2009, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > > Comparing with 2.6.29's result, tiobench (read) has about 50% regression
> > > with 2.6.30-rc1 on all my machines. Bisect down to below patch.
> > >
> > > b029195dda0129b427c6e579a3bb3ae752da3a93 is first bad commit
> > > commit b029195dda0129b427c6e579a3bb3ae752da3a93
> > > Author: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
> > > Date: Tue Apr 7 11:38:31 2009 +0200
> > >
> > > cfq-iosched: don't let idling interfere with plugging
> > >
> > > When CFQ is waiting for a new request from a process, currently it'll
> > > immediately restart queuing when it sees such a request. This doesn't
> > > work very well with streamed IO, since we then end up splitting IO
> > > that would otherwise have been merged nicely. For a simple dd test,
> > > this causes 10x as many requests to be issued as we should have.
> > > Normally this goes unnoticed due to the low overhead of requests
> > > at the device side, but some hardware is very sensitive to request
> > > sizes and there it can cause big slow downs.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Command to start the testing:
> > > #tiotest -k0 -k1 -k3 -f 80 -t 32
> > >
> > > It's a multi-threaded program and starts 32 threads. Every thread does I/O
> > > on its own 80MB file.
> The files should be created before the testing and pls. drop page caches
> by "echo 3 >/proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" before testing.
>
> >
> > It's not a huge surprise that we regressed there. I'll get this fixed up
> > next week. Can you I talk you into trying to change the 'quantum' sysfs
> > variable for the drive? It's in /sys/block/xxx/queue/iosched where xxx
> > is your drive(s). It's set to 4, if you could try progressively larger
> > settings and retest, that would help get things started.
> I tried 4,8,16,64,128 and didn't find result difference.

Can you try with this patch?

diff --git a/block/cfq-iosched.c b/block/cfq-iosched.c
index a4809de..66f00e5 100644
--- a/block/cfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/cfq-iosched.c
@@ -1905,10 +1905,17 @@ cfq_rq_enqueued(struct cfq_data *cfqd, struct cfq_queue *cfqq,
* Remember that we saw a request from this process, but
* don't start queuing just yet. Otherwise we risk seeing lots
* of tiny requests, because we disrupt the normal plugging
- * and merging.
+ * and merging. If the request is already larger than a single
+ * page, let it rip immediately. For that case we assume that
+ * merging is already done.
*/
- if (cfq_cfqq_wait_request(cfqq))
+ if (cfq_cfqq_wait_request(cfqq)) {
+ if (blk_rq_bytes(rq) > PAGE_CACHE_SIZE) {
+ del_timer(&cfqd->idle_slice_timer);
+ blk_start_queueing(cfqd->queue);
+ }
cfq_mark_cfqq_must_dispatch(cfqq);
+ }
} else if (cfq_should_preempt(cfqd, cfqq, rq)) {
/*
* not the active queue - expire current slice if it is
--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-14 14:17    [W:0.074 / U:2.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site