Re: [PATCH] virtio_blk: Drop unused request tracking list

[Asias He <asias.hejun@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Stefan

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Asias He <asias@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Benchmark shows small performance improvement on fusion io device.
>>
>> Before:
>>  seq-read : io=1,024MB, bw=19,982KB/s, iops=39,964, runt= 52475msec
>>  seq-write: io=1,024MB, bw=20,321KB/s, iops=40,641, runt= 51601msec
>>  rnd-read : io=1,024MB, bw=15,404KB/s, iops=30,808, runt= 68070msec
>>  rnd-write: io=1,024MB, bw=14,776KB/s, iops=29,552, runt= 70963msec
>>
>> After:
>>  seq-read : io=1,024MB, bw=20,343KB/s, iops=40,685, runt= 51546msec
>>  seq-write: io=1,024MB, bw=20,803KB/s, iops=41,606, runt= 50404msec
>>  rnd-read : io=1,024MB, bw=16,221KB/s, iops=32,442, runt= 64642msec
>>  rnd-write: io=1,024MB, bw=15,199KB/s, iops=30,397, runt= 68991msec
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Asias He <asias@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/block/virtio_blk.c |   10 ----------
>>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks for providing performance results.  It's a bit scary that this
> unused list has an impact...I'm sure we have worse things elsewhere in
> the KVM storage code path.

Do you find any worse things? I saw your trace work here:

   http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Virtio/Block/Latency

> Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks for reviewing!

--
Asias He
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization