[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 2/2] scsi-disk: Add native FUA support
From: |
Kevin Wolf |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 2/2] scsi-disk: Add native FUA support |
Date: |
Tue, 25 Mar 2025 13:48:35 +0100 |
Am 06.03.2025 um 11:33 hat Kevin Wolf geschrieben:
> Am 04.03.2025 um 16:52 hat Alberto Faria geschrieben:
> > Avoid emulating FUA when the driver supports it natively. This should
> > provide better performance than a full flush after the write.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alberto Faria <afaria@redhat.com>
>
> Did you try out if you can see performance improvements in practice?
> It's always nice to have numbers in the commit message for patches that
> promise performance improvements.
I was curious enough to see how this and the recent series by Stefan
(virtio-scsi multiqueue) and myself (FUA on the backend + polling
improvements) play out with virtio-scsi, so I just ran some fio
benchmarks with sync=1 myself to compare:
iops bs=4k cache=none | virtio-scsi | virtio-blk |
O_SYNC workload | qd 1 | qd 16 | qd 1 | qd 16 |
--------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
master | 21296 | 109747 | 25762 | 130576 |
+ virtio-scsi multiqueue | 28798 | 121170 | - | - |
+ FUA in scsi-disk | 51893 | 204199 | - | - |
--------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
Total change | +143.7% | +86.1% | - | - |
(No new numbers for virtio-blk because virtio-scsi patches obviously
don't change anything about it. Also no numbers for FUA in file-posix
because it's unused with cache=none.)
iops bs=4k cache=directsync | virtio-scsi | virtio-blk |
O_SYNC workload | qd 1 | qd 16 | qd 1 | qd 16 |
--------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
master | 32223 | 109748 | 45583 | 258416 |
+ FUA in file-posix + polling | 32148 | 198665 | 58601 | 320190 |
+ virtio-scsi multiqueue | 51739 | 225031 | - | - |
+ FUA in scsi-disk | 56061 | 227535 | - | - |
--------------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
Total change | +74.0% | +107.3% | +28.6% | +23.9% |
Of course, the huge improvements on the virtio-scsi side only show how
bad it was before. In most numbers it is still behind virtio-blk even
after all three patch series (apart from cache=none where the
availability of FUA on the device side makes a big difference, and I
expect that virtio-blk will improve similarly once we implement it
there).
Also note that when testing the virtio-scsi multiqueue patches, this
was still a single iothread, i.e. I wasn't even making use of the new
feature per se. I assume much of this comes from enabling polling
because the series moved the event queue handling to the main loop,
which prevented polling for virtio-scsi before. The series also got rid
of an extra coroutine per request for the blk_is_available() call in
virtio_scsi_ctx_check(), which might play a role, too.
Anyway, I like these numbers for FUA in scsi-disk. It makes write back
cache modes almost catch up to write through with O_SYNC workloads. We
should definitely get this merged and do the same for virtio-blk.
Kevin