Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-10 Thread John Garry
On 10/10/2017 14:45, Ming Lei wrote: Hi John, All change in V6.2 is blk-mq/scsi-mq only, which shouldn't affect non SCSI_MQ, so I suggest you to compare the perf between deadline and mq-deadline, like Johannes mentioned. > > V6.2 series with default SCSI_MQ > read, rw, write IOPS >

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-10 Thread Ming Lei
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 01:24:52PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 10/10/2017 02:46, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > > > I tested this series for the SAS controller on HiSilicon hip07 > > > > > > platform as I > > > > > > am interested in enabling MQ for this driver. Driver is > > > > > >

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-10 Thread Paolo Valente
> Il giorno 10 ott 2017, alle ore 14:34, Johannes Thumshirn > ha scritto: > > Hi John, > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 01:24:52PM +0100, John Garry wrote: >> It's using cfq (for non-mq) and mq-deadline (obviously for mq). > > Please be aware that cfq and mq-deadline are _not_

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-10 Thread Johannes Thumshirn
Hi John, On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 01:24:52PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > It's using cfq (for non-mq) and mq-deadline (obviously for mq). Please be aware that cfq and mq-deadline are _not_ comparable, for a realistic comparasion please use deadline and mq-deadline or cfq and bfq. > root@(none)$

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-10 Thread John Garry
On 10/10/2017 02:46, Ming Lei wrote: > > I tested this series for the SAS controller on HiSilicon hip07 platform as I > > am interested in enabling MQ for this driver. Driver is > > ./drivers/scsi/hisi_sas/. > > > > So I found that that performance is improved when enabling default SCSI_MQ > >

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-09 Thread Ming Lei
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 11:04:39PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi John, > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 01:09:22PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > > On 30/09/2017 11:27, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Hi Jens, > > > > > > In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we > > > found that I/O performance is

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-09 Thread Ming Lei
Hi John, On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 01:09:22PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 30/09/2017 11:27, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi Jens, > > > > In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we > > found that I/O performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially > > about sequential I/O on some

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-10-09 Thread John Garry
On 30/09/2017 11:27, Ming Lei wrote: Hi Jens, In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we found that I/O performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially about sequential I/O on some multi-queue SCSI devcies(lpfc, qla2xxx, SRP...) Turns out one big issue causes the

Re: [PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-09-30 Thread Ming Lei
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 06:27:13PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi Jens, > > In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we > found that I/O performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially > about sequential I/O on some multi-queue SCSI devcies(lpfc, qla2xxx, > SRP...) > > Turns out

[PATCH V5 00/14] blk-mq-sched: improve sequential I/O performance(part 1)

2017-09-30 Thread Ming Lei
Hi Jens, In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we found that I/O performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially about sequential I/O on some multi-queue SCSI devcies(lpfc, qla2xxx, SRP...) Turns out one big issue causes the performance regression: requests are still