Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 3 May 2023 10:28:53 -0600
From:   Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To:     jiweisun126@126.com
Cc:     linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        axboe@fb.com, hch@lst.de, sagi@grimberg.me, ahuang12@lenovo.com,
        sunjw10@lenovo.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: add cond_resched() to nvme_complete_batch()
Message-ID: <ZFKLxfet7qUIwScd@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
References: <20230502125412.65633-1-jiweisun126@126.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230502125412.65633-1-jiweisun126@126.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 08:54:12PM +0800, jiweisun126@126.com wrote:
> According to the above two logs, we can know the nvme_irq() cost too much
> time, in the above case, about 4.8 second. And we can also know that the
> main bottlenecks is in the competition for the spin lock pool->lock.

I have a fix that makes pool->lock critical section much shorter and constant
time. It was staged in mm tree for months, but mysteriously it's missing...