Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: CFQ idling kills I/O performance on ext4 with blkio cgroup
 controller
To:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        jmoyer@redhat.com, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
        amakhalov@vmware.com, anishs@vmware.com, srivatsab@vmware.com
References: <8d72fcf7-bbb4-2965-1a06-e9fc177a8938@csail.mit.edu>
 <1812E450-14EF-4D5A-8F31-668499E13652@linaro.org>
 <46c6a4be-f567-3621-2e16-0e341762b828@csail.mit.edu>
 <07D11833-8285-49C2-943D-E4C1D23E8859@linaro.org>
 <A0DFE635-EFEC-4670-AD70-5D813E170BEE@linaro.org>
 <5B6570A2-541A-4CF8-98E0-979EA6E3717D@linaro.org>
 <2CB39B34-21EE-4A95-A073-8633CF2D187C@linaro.org>
 <FC24E25F-4578-454D-AE2B-8D8D352478D8@linaro.org>
From:   "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@csail.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <0e3fdf31-70d9-26eb-7b42-2795d4b03722@csail.mit.edu>
Date:   Tue, 21 May 2019 15:51:46 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <FC24E25F-4578-454D-AE2B-8D8D352478D8@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

[ Resending this mail with a dropbox link to the traces (instead
of a file attachment), since it didn't go through the last time. ]

On 5/21/19 10:38 AM, Paolo Valente wrote:
> 
>> So, instead of only sending me a trace, could you please:
>> 1) apply this new patch on top of the one I attached in my previous email
>> 2) repeat your test and report results
> 
> One last thing (I swear!): as you can see from my script, I tested the
> case low_latency=0 so far.  So please, for the moment, do your test
> with low_latency=0.  You find the whole path to this parameter in,
> e.g., my script.
> 
No problem! :) Thank you for sharing patches for me to test!

I have good news :) Your patch improves the throughput significantly
when low_latency = 0.

Without any patch:

dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/test.img bs=512 count=10000 oflag=dsync
10000+0 records in
10000+0 records out
5120000 bytes (5.1 MB, 4.9 MiB) copied, 58.0915 s, 88.1 kB/s


With both patches applied:

dd if=/dev/zero of=/root/test0.img bs=512 count=10000 oflag=dsync
10000+0 records in
10000+0 records out
5120000 bytes (5.1 MB, 4.9 MiB) copied, 3.87487 s, 1.3 MB/s

The performance is still not as good as mq-deadline (which achieves
1.6 MB/s), but this is a huge improvement for BFQ nonetheless!

A tarball with the trace output from the 2 scenarios you requested,
one with only the debug patch applied (trace-bfq-add-logs-and-BUG_ONs),
and another with both patches applied (trace-bfq-boost-injection) is
available here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pdf07vi7afido7e/bfq-traces.tar.gz?dl=0

Thank you!
 
Regards,
Srivatsa
VMware Photon OS