On 11/13/24 3:23 PM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > On 11/13/2024 12:51 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>> Looks good to me. I ran the quick performance numbers [1]. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni<kch@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> -ck >>> >>> fio randread iouring workload :- >>> >>> IOPS :- >>> ------- >>> nvme-orig: Average IOPS: 72,690 >>> nvme-new-no-reorder: Average IOPS: 72,580 >>> >>> BW :- >>> ------- >>> nvme-orig: Average BW: 283.9 MiB/s >>> nvme-new-no-reorder: Average BW: 283.4 MiB/s >> Thanks for testing, but you can't verify any kind of perf change with >> that kind of setup. I'll be willing to bet that it'll be 1-2% drop at >> higher rates, which is substantial. But the reordering is a problem, not >> just for zoned devices, which is why I chose to merge this. >> >> -- Jens Axboe > > Agree with you. My intention was to test it, since it was touching NVMe, > I thought sharing results will help either way with io_uring? > but no intention to stop this patchset and make an argument > against it (if at all) for potential drop :). Oh all good, and like I said, the testing is appreciated! The functional testing is definitely useful. -- Jens Axboe
