On Fri, 2019-02-15 at 21:19 +-0000, Felipe Franciosi wrote: +AD4 Hi All, +AD4 +AD4 I'd like to attend LSF/MM this year and discuss the kernel performance when accessing NVMe devices, specifically (but not limited to) Intel Optane Memory (which boasts very low latency and high +AD4 iops/throughput per NVMe controller). +AD4 +AD4 Over the last year or two, I have done extensive experimentation comparing applications using libaio to those using SDPK. For hypervisors, where storage devices can be exclusively accessed with +AD4 userspace drivers (given the device can be dedicated to a single process), using SPDK has proven to be significantly faster and more efficient. That remains true even in the latest versions of the +AD4 kernel. +AD4 +AD4 I have presented work focusing on hypervisors in several conferences during this time. Although I appreciate the LSF/MM is more discussion-oriented, I am linking a couple of these presentations for +AD4 reference: +AD4 +AD4 Flash Memory Summit 2018 +AD4 https://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2018/20180808+AF8-SOFT-202-1+AF8-Franciosi.pdf +AD4 +AD4 Linux Piter 2018 +AD4 https://linuxpiter.com/system/attachments/files/000/001/558/original/20181103+AF8--+AF8-AHV+AF8-and+AF8-SPDK.pdf +AD4 +AD4 For LSF/MM, instead of focusing on hypervisors, I would like to discuss what can be done to achieve better efficiency and performance when using the kernel. My data include detailed results +AD4 considering various scenarios like different NUMA configurations, IRQ affinity and polling modes. Hi Felipe, It seems like you missed the performance comparison between SPDK and io+AF8-uring Jens posted recently? Bart.
