[dm-devel] [PATCH 4/4] dm: support I/O polling

[Heinz Mauelshagen]

On 3/5/21 10:52 AM, JeffleXu wrote:
>
> On 3/3/21 6:09 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 3 Mar 2021, JeffleXu wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 3/3/21 3:05 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>>>
>>>> Support I/O polling if submit_bio_noacct_mq_direct returned non-empty
>>>> cookie.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka at redhat.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/md/dm.c |    5 +++++
>>>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm.c
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm.c	2021-03-02 19:26:34.000000000 +0100
>>>> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm.c	2021-03-02 19:26:34.000000000 +0100
>>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,11 @@ static void __split_and_process_bio(stru
>>>>   		}
>>>>   	}
>>>>   
>>>> +	if (ci.poll_cookie != BLK_QC_T_NONE) {
>>>> +		while (atomic_read(&ci.io->io_count) > 1 &&
>>>> +		       blk_poll(ci.poll_queue, ci.poll_cookie, true)) ;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>>   	/* drop the extra reference count */
>>>>   	dec_pending(ci.io, errno_to_blk_status(error));
>>>>   }
>>> It seems that the general idea of your design is to
>>> 1) submit *one* split bio
>>> 2) blk_poll(), waiting the previously submitted split bio complets
>> No, I submit all the bios and poll for the last one.
>>
>>> and then submit next split bio, repeating the above process. I'm afraid
>>> the performance may be an issue here, since the batch every time
>>> blk_poll() reaps may decrease.
>> Could you benchmark it?
> I only tested dm-linear.
>
> The configuration (dm table) of dm-linear is:
> 0 1048576 linear /dev/nvme0n1 0
> 1048576 1048576 linear /dev/nvme2n1 0
> 2097152 1048576 linear /dev/nvme5n1 0
>
>
> fio script used is:
> ```
> $cat fio.conf
> [global]
> name=iouring-sqpoll-iopoll-1
> ioengine=io_uring
> iodepth=128
> numjobs=1
> thread
> rw=randread
> direct=1
> registerfiles=1
> hipri=1
> runtime=10
> time_based
> group_reporting
> randrepeat=0
> filename=/dev/mapper/testdev
> bs=4k
>
> [job-1]
> cpus_allowed=14
> ```
>
> IOPS (IRQ mode) | IOPS (iopoll mode (hipri=1))
> --------------- | --------------------
>             213k |		   19k
>
> At least, it doesn't work well with io_uring interface.
>
>


Jeffe,

I ran your above fio test on a linear LV split across 3 NVMes to second your split mapping
(system: 32 core Intel, 256GiB RAM) comparing io engines sync, libaio and io_uring,
the latter w/ and w/o hipri (sync+libaio obviously w/o registerfiles and hipri) which resulted ok:



sync  |  libaio  |  IRQ mode (hipri=0) | iopoll (hipri=1) 
------|----------|---------------------|----------------- 56.3K |    
290K  |                329K |             351K I can't second your 
drastic hipri=1 drop here...
Heinz