lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: nvme: utilize two queue maps, one for reads and one for writes
On Tue, Nov 13 2018 at  8:28pm -0500,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 13 2018 at 7:51pm -0500,
> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>
> > On 11/13/18 5:41 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 08:36:31AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > >> NVMe does round-robin between queues by default, which means that
> > >> sharing a queue map for both reads and writes can be problematic
> > >> in terms of read servicing. It's much easier to flood the queue
> > >> with writes and reduce the read servicing.
> > >>
> > >> Implement two queue maps, one for reads and one for writes. The
> > >> write queue count is configurable through the 'write_queues'
> > >> parameter.
> > >>
> > >> By default, we retain the previous behavior of having a single
> > >> queue set, shared between reads and writes. Setting 'write_queues'
> > >> to a non-zero value will create two queue sets, one for reads and
> > >> one for writes, the latter using the configurable number of
> > >> queues (hardware queue counts permitting).
> > >>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > >
> > > This patch causes hangs when running recent versions of
> > > -next with several architectures; see the -next column at
> > > kerneltests.org/builders for details. Bisect log below; this
> > > was run with qemu on alpha. Reverting this patch as well as
> > > "nvme: add separate poll queue map" fixes the problem.
> >
> > I don't see anything related to what hung, the trace, and so on.
> > Can you clue me in? Where are the test results with dmesg?
> >
> > How to reproduce?
>
> Think Guenter should've provided a full kerneltests.org url, but I had a
> look and found this for powerpc with -next:
> https://kerneltests.org/builders/next-powerpc-next/builds/998/steps/buildcommand/logs/stdio
>
> Has useful logs of the build failure due to block.

Take that back, of course I only had a quick look and first scrolled to
this fragment and thought "yeap shows block build failure" (not
_really_):

opt/buildbot/slave/next-next/build/kernel/sched/psi.c: In function 'cgroup_move_task':
/opt/buildbot/slave/next-next/build/include/linux/spinlock.h:273:32: warning: 'rq' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
#define raw_spin_unlock(lock) _raw_spin_unlock(lock)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/opt/buildbot/slave/next-next/build/kernel/sched/psi.c:639:13: note: 'rq' was declared here
struct rq *rq;
^~

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-14 02:37    [W:0.104 / U:0.696 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site