On 2019/09/19 17:48, Kashyap Desai wrote:
>>>> - } else if (plug && (q->nr_hw_queues == 1 || q->mq_ops-
>>> commit_rqs)) {
>>>> + } else if (plug && q->mq_ops->commit_rqs) {
>>>> /*
>>>> * Use plugging if we have a ->commit_rqs() hook as well,
> as
>>>> * we know the driver uses bd->last in a smart fashion.
>>>> @@ -2020,9 +2019,6 @@ static blk_qc_t blk_mq_make_request(struct
>> request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
>>>> blk_mq_try_issue_directly(data.hctx,
> same_queue_rq,
>>>> &cookie);
>>>> }
>>>> - } else if ((q->nr_hw_queues > 1 && is_sync) || (!q->elevator &&
>>>> - !data.hctx->dispatch_busy)) {
>>>> - blk_mq_try_issue_directly(data.hctx, rq, &cookie);
> Hannes -
>
> Earlier check prior to "commit 6ce3dd6eec114930cf2035a8bcb1e80477ed79a8"
> was only (q->nr_hw_queues > 1 && is_sync).
> I am not sure if check of nr_hw_queues are required or not at this place,
> but other part of check (!q->elevator && !data.hctx->dispatch_busy) to
> qualify for direct dispatch is required for higher performance.
>
> Recent MegaRaid and MPT HBA Aero series controller is capable of doing
> ~3.0 M IOPs and for such high performance using single hardware queue,
> commit 6ce3dd6eec114930cf2035a8bcb1e80477ed79a8 is very important.
Kashyap, Ming,
Thanks for the information. We will restore this case.
>
> Kashyap
>
>
>>>
>>> It may be worth mentioning that blk_mq_sched_insert_request() will do
>>> a direct insert of the request using __blk_mq_insert_request(). But
>>> that insert is slightly different from what
>>> blk_mq_try_issue_directly() does with
>>> __blk_mq_issue_directly() as the request in that case is passed along
>>> to the device using queue->mq_ops->queue_rq() while
>>> __blk_mq_insert_request() will put the request in ctx->rq_lists[type].
>>>
>>> This removes the optimized case !q->elevator &&
>>> !data.hctx->dispatch_busy, but I am not sure of the actual performance
>>> impact yet. We may want to patch
>>> blk_mq_sched_insert_request() to handle that case.
>>
>> The optimization did improve IOPS of single queue SCSI SSD a lot, see
>>
>> commit 6ce3dd6eec114930cf2035a8bcb1e80477ed79a8
>> Author: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue Jul 10 09:03:31 2018 +0800
>>
>> blk-mq: issue directly if hw queue isn't busy in case of 'none'
>>
>> In case of 'none' io scheduler, when hw queue isn't busy, it isn't
>> necessary to enqueue request to sw queue and dequeue it from
>> sw queue because request may be submitted to hw queue asap without
>> extra cost, meantime there shouldn't be much request in sw queue,
>> and we don't need to worry about effect on IO merge.
>>
>> There are still some single hw queue SCSI HBAs(HPSA, megaraid_sas,
> ...)
>> which may connect high performance devices, so 'none' is often
> required
>> for obtaining good performance.
>>
>> This patch improves IOPS and decreases CPU unilization on
> megaraid_sas,
>> per Kashyap's test.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ming
>
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
