On 12/18/2015 04:36 PM, John Garry wrote:
On 18/12/2015 15:19, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 12/18/2015 04:08 PM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
On 12/18/2015 03:58 PM, John Garry wrote:
Hi,
I have started to enable scsi-mq on the HiSilicon SAS driver.
Are there hints/checks I should use to make sure it is configured
correctly/optimally? In my initial testing I have seen some
performance improvements, but none like what I have seen in
presentations.
The whole thing is build around having symmetric submit and receive
queues, so that we can tack a send/receive queue pair to the same
CPU.
With that we can ensure that we don't have any cache
invalidation, as
the request is already in the cache for that CPU when the
completion is
recieved. _And_ we can get rid of most spinlocks as other CPUs
cannot
access our request.
So make sure to have the submit and receive queues properly done,
and
ensure you don't have any global resources within your driver which
needs to be locked. Or move access to those resources out of the
fast
path.
Hello John,
It's great news that you started looking into scsi-mq support :-) As
Hannes wrote, if the performance improvement is not as big as you
expected this could be caused e.g. by lock contention. Are you
familiar
with the perf tool ? The perf tool can be a great help to verify
whether
lock contention occurs and also which lock(s) cause it.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Thanks for the replies.
One of my main concerns is how we use a spinlock in our task exec
function to prepare and deliver a frame to the hardware:
hisi_sas_task_exec()
{
...
/* protect task_prep and start_delivery sequence */
spin_lock_irqsave(&hisi_hba->lock, flags);
rc = hisi_sas_task_prep(task, hisi_hba, is_tmf, tmf, &pass);
...
hisi_hba->hw->start_delivery(hisi_hba);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hisi_hba->lock, flags);
...
}
We have to lock due to how we reserve a slot in the delivery queue.
We are looking to optimise this, but it's not straightforward.
Perf is a good strategy, but, to be honest, I have not spent a lot
of time looking at this so I'm looking for low hanging fruit initially.
FYI, our hardware does have the same number of delivery and
completion queues (32), and 16 cores. One thing to note is that a
command which was sent on queue x is not quaranteed to complete on
queue y.
... then don't bother looking at scsi-mq. That is the very thing it
relies on ...
Time to change the firmware?
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
