[Report] requests are submitted to hardware in reverse order from nvme/virtio-blk queue_rqs()
Bart Van Assche
bvanassche at acm.org
Mon Oct 7 15:39:42 PDT 2024
On 1/26/24 6:10 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:59:54PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Requests are added to plug list in reverse order, and both virtio-blk
>> and nvme retrieves request from plug list in order, so finally requests
>> are submitted to hardware in reverse order via nvme_queue_rqs() or
>> virtio_queue_rqs, see:
>
>> May this reorder be one problem for virtio-blk and nvme-pci?
>
> It it isn't really a problem for the drivers, but de-serializing
> I/O patterns tends to be not good. I know at least a couple cases
> where this would hurt:
>
> - SSDs with sequential write detection
> - zoned SSDs with zoned append, as this now turns a sequential
> user write pattern into one that is fairly random
> - HDDs much prefer real sequential I/O, although until nvme HDDs
> go beyong the prototype stage that's probably not hitting this
> case yet
>
> So yes, we should fix this.
(replying to an email from January)
For my patch series that supports pipelining for zoned writes, I need
the submission order to be preserved. Jens mentioned two possible
solutions:
- Either keep the approach that requests on plug->mq_list are in reverse
order and reverse the request order just before submitting requests.
- Or change plug->mq_list into a doubly linked list.
The second approach seems the most interesting to me. I'm concerned that
with the first approach it will be difficult to preserve the request
order if a subset of the requests on plug->mq_list are submitted, e.g.
because a queue full condition is encountered by
blk_mq_dispatch_plug_list().
Thanks,
Bart.
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list