On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11-01-27 09:43 AM, James Bottomley wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2011-01-27 at 22:04 +0800, BingJiun Luo wrote: >>> >>> I want to measure SATA AHCI Host controller read performance. Open >>> /dev/sda and using read(int fildes, void *buf, size_t nbyte) user space >>> function to read 2048 times, each time 64KByets, and total 128 Mbytes. >>> >>> I measured the time start from one step before write CI register inside >>> ahci_qc_issue() function until ahci_port_intr () is called in the >>> interrupt >>> context. It takes about 1 milliseconds to complete one 256KBytes READ >>> DMA EXT command, and spend about 15 microseconds call to scsi_done(). >>> >>> However, why scsi_request_fn is called about after 4 milliseconds >>> to pass next IO request for Hardware to issue? It take less if the READ >>> DMA command with less number of sectors. >> >> I'm not sure I parse the question, but I think you're asking why we >> chain the next issue from the softirq in SCSI? That's because most SCSI >> devices are tagged and the bus is the bottleneck, so after processing >> the completion, we need to get the next command out ASAP to keep the bus >> utilised to capacity. >> >>> My questions are: >>> 1. Is it the time to prepare one 256 KB READ DMA EXT command by upper >>> layer (Block Layer or Virtual File system Layer)? Or, It is the time to >>> copy >>> data from kernel space memory to user space memory after data is read >>> back from Hard Drive and delay the next command pass to SCSI? >> >> Everything in SCSI is done with zero copy (as in we DMA straight to the >> pagecache page, which is then attached to userspace). > > Just to add some numbers to that point, on this CPU: > Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 540 @ 2.53GHz > [a Lenovo X201 laptop] with a dummy logical unit > (pseudo disk) set up with this invocation: > $ modprobe scsi_debug delay=0 virtual_gb=2468 > with lk 2.6.37 I measure the following. > > $ ddpt if=/dev/bsg/7:0:0:0 bs=512 count=1m bpt=1 > Output file not specified so no copy, just reading input > 1048576+0 records in > 0+0 records out > time to read data: 4.815756 secs at 111.48 MB/sec > > That is issuing over 1 million SCSI READ commands from a > user space program (and reading the data returned) in less > that 5 seconds. So the SCSI READ command overhead is better > (i.e. less) than 5 microseconds per command. > It depends one how many sectors to be read per command? If 512 sectors are read per time, it spends about 900 microseconds. > Increase the "blocks per transfer" (bpt) to 512 to see > the data throughput (plus fetch 10m blocks) and this > is the result: > > $ ddpt if=/dev/bsg/7:0:0:0 bs=512 count=10m bpt=512 > Output file not specified so no copy, just reading input > 10485760+0 records in > 0+0 records out > time to read data: 1.896136 secs at 2831.39 MB/sec > > The latter figure is around 800 MB/sec using the Ubuntu > 10.10 stock kernel (lk 2.6.35-24-generic) on the same > machine. Something increased data throughput considerably > between lk 2.6.35 and 2.6.37 . OTOH it may be a > difference in my .config settings. > > > So the latency per command added by the kernel and the > SCSI subsystem (apart from the low level driver and the > transport) is measured in microseconds rather than > milliseconds. > I am not running on PC, but embedded system CPU=512MHz and AHB bus 133 MHz. I think there is the different. I can only read about 112 MBytes in 3 seconds. Using hdparm. Kernel version 2.6.28. > Doug Gilbert > > > PS Another throughput datapoint, using the block > subsystem (rather than a pass-through): > $ ddpt if=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=10m bpt=512 > Output file not specified so no copy, just reading input > 10485760+0 records in > 0+0 records out > time to read data: 4.807517 secs at 1116.73 MB/sec > > >>> I know some architecture has not good enough performance to do memcpy >>> or something like that. >>> >>> 2. If I do not mount /dev/sda to any file system, what is the first >>> kernel function >>> called after read() function from user space? Is it located at VFS or >>> directly to >>> Block layer? >> >> I think you need to trace this for yourself ... it's complex because >> read doesn't go to the device, it goes via the page cache, which is also >> how the VFS operates. If the pages are all current in the cache, a >> read() doesn't have to trouble the disk. >> >>> Because I want to keep track the time spend at the layer higher than >>> SCSI. >>> >>> 3. When scsi_done() is called, what is the function to process this >>> completed >>> command and pass the data to user space? I think there might be somewhere >>> inside the code to copy this data from kernel space memory address to >>> user >>> space memory address. >> >> scsi_done doesn't do anything about completion, it triggers the block >> softirq to schedule a completion for us when all interrupts are >> processed. >> >> James > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
