Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:5bc5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id os5csp4120785pxb; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 04:35:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJys/3mP7TtrKd6pCjSNv/1nMjtAi3BFKtbpM2DBF6pU+XTBn+xDWqQNYKxaojpw4tmLWCAf X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6ea3:: with SMTP id sh35mr43949464ejc.264.1635852947481; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 04:35:47 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1635852947; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=RWPSGyhTFJ7IehEbMPuRNiaVQjmaJ68fP7xL+iWbSYztlvDcmFZPvonDVMsu9rET9l U/42Cfv1pA2zQo/sslZXhfukSNr0KNwk3rNfeICM2KR7ispEL++LdSMtA0mZu2rlVAkG X88rvN0Xhks80DbJ8au/+aRyVgXNhV5eHSsUnNOkK7TFF+ktmVBsefdk7rT4Eb4+AA08 8X2X+RB+GOR3QnDL8OEDUycJpdkSO6EK9LUWj5DLzQ5i1SD/nMrmFYbuoQREJEOwuR4g FsX3r0nr1sAvcueYSHlLIajPU6LKxEtdasdV4iQcpXsmpl7CRAMCOZKLFNrtGXPwJR0s SYPA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from; bh=07Fesx3lYH3hW4HCC1njAMn9SziGP6v2gCLTttJrdJs=; b=N6Oi8tZlb4xT0Maec1LNC4lle6zVddTDjggex2a+obiGKf0ma123CY0fGgmG5fZVUd pQ1fK/THCyDzIcN5mmtsUd/V9p2pE/4nH9nZlIonwTDd74N4kwgrcznc0/Y9vO5o4SmG rdNIMCIYsLqkL1B1+3Io8V54go40ZbTqKS5LMbWI2spZTlz1h6Ik5oLllQ7DjUMlkO2/ ae4wL/maJvTm9KWlClU9ES9ww36K+Qk45miKbHYa1yXV1HgNfC+246Cu1i+jvx7W/CnZ ATlktBmPjkhGGXGrdDY+gjT56L0ieMO3tRFpK8PB/f4Ca+ipvrxlBZN7L6PaPnBwZ6nY G7/A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id qw39si2777526ejc.73.2021.11.02.04.35.22; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 04:35:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231267AbhKBLf1 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 2 Nov 2021 07:35:27 -0400 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com ([185.176.79.56]:4048 "EHLO frasgout.his.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230326AbhKBLfW (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2021 07:35:22 -0400 Received: from fraeml705-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Hk7360By4z67jfs; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 19:29:22 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) by fraeml705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.54) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2308.15; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 12:32:44 +0100 Received: from localhost.localdomain (10.69.192.58) by lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.15; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 11:32:42 +0000 From: John Garry To: CC: , , , , , "John Garry" Subject: [PATCH RFT 0/3] blk-mq: Optimise blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() for shared tags Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 19:27:32 +0800 Message-ID: <1635852455-39935-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Originating-IP: [10.69.192.58] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.180) To lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In [0], Kashyap reports high CPU usage for blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() and callees for shared tags. Indeed blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() would be less optimum for moving to shared tags, but it was not optimum previously. So I would like this series tested, and also to know what is triggering blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() from userspace to cause such high CPU loading. As suggested by Ming, reading /proc/diskstats in a while true loop can trigger blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter(); I do so in a test with 2x separate consoles, and here are the results: v5.15 blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() 6.2% part_stat_read_all() 6.7 pre-v5.16 (Linus' master branch @ commit bfc484fe6abb) blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() 4.5% part_stat_read_all() 6.2 pre-v5.16+this series blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() not shown in top users part_stat_read_all() 7.5% These results are from perf top, on a system with 7x disks, with hisi_sas which has 16x HW queues. [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/e4e92abbe9d52bcba6b8cc6c91c442cc@mail.gmail.com/ John Garry (3): blk-mq: Drop busy_iter_fn blk_mq_hw_ctx argument blk-mq: Delete busy_iter_fn blk-mq: Optimise blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() for shared tags block/blk-mq-tag.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- block/blk-mq-tag.h | 2 +- block/blk-mq.c | 17 ++++++------- include/linux/blk-mq.h | 2 -- 4 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1