NVMe over RDMA latency
Sagi Grimberg
sagi at grimberg.me
Wed Jul 13 02:49:46 PDT 2016
> Hi list,
Hey Ming,
> I'm trying to understand the NVMe over RDMA latency.
>
> Test hardware:
> A real NVMe PCI drive on target
> Host and target back-to-back connected by Mellanox ConnectX-3
>
> [global]
> ioengine=libaio
> direct=1
> runtime=10
> time_based
> norandommap
> group_reporting
>
> [job1]
> filename=/dev/nvme0n1
> rw=randread
> bs=4k
>
>
> fio latency data on host side(test nvmeof device)
> slat (usec): min=2, max=213, avg= 6.34, stdev= 3.47
> clat (usec): min=1, max=2470, avg=39.56, stdev=13.04
> lat (usec): min=30, max=2476, avg=46.14, stdev=15.50
>
> fio latency data on target side(test NVMe pci device locally)
> slat (usec): min=1, max=36, avg= 1.92, stdev= 0.42
> clat (usec): min=1, max=68, avg=20.35, stdev= 1.11
> lat (usec): min=19, max=101, avg=22.35, stdev= 1.21
>
> So I picked up this sample from blktrace which seems matches the fio avg latency data.
>
> Host(/dev/nvme0n1)
> 259,0 0 86 0.015768739 3241 Q R 1272199648 + 8 [fio]
> 259,0 0 87 0.015769674 3241 G R 1272199648 + 8 [fio]
> 259,0 0 88 0.015771628 3241 U N [fio] 1
> 259,0 0 89 0.015771901 3241 I RS 1272199648 + 8 ( 2227) [fio]
> 259,0 0 90 0.015772863 3241 D RS 1272199648 + 8 ( 962) [fio]
> 259,0 1 85 0.015819257 0 C RS 1272199648 + 8 ( 46394) [0]
>
> Target(/dev/nvme0n1)
> 259,0 0 141 0.015675637 2197 Q R 1272199648 + 8 [kworker/u17:0]
> 259,0 0 142 0.015676033 2197 G R 1272199648 + 8 [kworker/u17:0]
> 259,0 0 143 0.015676915 2197 D RS 1272199648 + 8 (15676915) [kworker/u17:0]
> 259,0 0 144 0.015694992 0 C RS 1272199648 + 8 ( 18077) [0]
>
> So host completed IO in about 50usec and target completed IO in about 20usec.
> Does that mean the 30usec delta comes from RDMA write(host read means target RDMA write)?
Couple of things that come to mind:
0. Are you using iodepth=1 correct?
1. I imagine you are not polling in the host but rather interrupt
driven correct? thats a latency source.
2. the target code is polling if the block device supports it. can you
confirm that is indeed the case?
3. mlx4 has a strong fencing policy for memory registration, which we
always do. thats a latency source. can you try with
register_always=0?
4. IRQ affinity assignments. if the sqe is submitted on cpu core X and
the completion comes to cpu core Y, we will consume some latency
with the context-switch of waiking up fio on cpu core X. Is this
a possible case?
5. What happens if you test against a null_blk (which has a latency of
< 1us)? back when I ran some tryouts I saw ~10-11us added latency
from the fabric under similar conditions.
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list