From: Mike Anderson <andmike@us.ibm.com>
To: Doug Maxey <dwm@enoyolf.org>
Cc: Ravi Anand <ravi.anand@qlogic.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>,
mikec linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: add support for shared tag maps
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:11:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060901201144.GA16135@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060901190423.806416@bebe.enoyolf.org>
Doug Maxey <dwm@enoyolf.org> wrote:
>
> Ravi,
>
> While working on a patch to add shared tags to qla4xxx was looking at
> the shost->can_queue settings, I see the value is set pretty high:
>
> qla4xxx_probe()
> ...
> host->can_queue = REQUEST_QUEUE_DEPTH + 128;
>
> where REQUEST_QUEUE_DEPTH works out to be 1024.
>
> My question:
> what is the relationship between the can_queue and the
> setting in
> qla4xxx_slave_configure()
> if (sdev->tagged_supported)
> scsi_activate_tcq(sdev, 32);
> else
> scsi_deactivate_tcq(sdev, 32);
>
> Does this imply that the firmware can ultimately track more requests
> than we can possibly stuff in it? Where do the other 1012 requests get
> queued, in the block layer?
Maybe I misreading your question. host->can_queue is the per host instance
(adapter) limit and scsi_activate_tcq will set the per dev (lun) limit.
host->can_queue being large is a good thing (if it is backed by real
resources). In theory can_queue should be scaled to support a hosts
${max_number_of_devices} * ${max_queue_depth}.
-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
andmike@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-01 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-01 6:31 [PATCH] block: add support for shared tag maps Ed Lin
2006-09-01 13:28 ` James Bottomley
2006-09-01 19:04 ` Doug Maxey
2006-09-01 20:11 ` Mike Anderson [this message]
2006-09-01 20:21 ` Ravi Anand
2006-09-01 20:52 ` James Bottomley
2006-09-18 18:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-09-18 19:10 ` James Bottomley
2006-09-18 19:25 ` Mike Christie
2006-09-19 2:20 ` Doug Ledford
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-08-31 8:55 Ed Lin
2006-08-31 9:00 ` Jens Axboe
2006-08-31 22:21 ` James Bottomley
2006-08-30 13:44 James Bottomley
2006-08-30 15:31 ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-08-30 15:39 ` James Bottomley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060901201144.GA16135@us.ibm.com \
--to=andmike@us.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=dwm@enoyolf.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ravi.anand@qlogic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.