All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, "v4.0" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O
Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 21:52:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150503015230.GG1949@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVMZWdxAPjL+QEjJDU-dyUcUmRbJicOXjGmw0S4ixpfnjA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 10:56:20PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Maybe just cap max_active to NR_OF_LOOP_DEVS * 16 or sth?  But idk,
> 
> It might not work because there are nested loop devices like fedora live CD, and
> in theory the max_active should have been set as loop's queue depth *
> nr_loop, otherwise there may be possibility of hanging.
> 
> So this patch is introduced.

If loop devices can be stacked, regardless of what you do with
nr_active, it may deadlock.  There needs to be a rescuer per each
nesting level (or just one per device).  This means that the current
code is broken.

> > how many concurrent workers are we talking about and why are we
> > capping per-queue concurrency from worker pool side instead of command
> > tag side?
> 
> I think there should be performance advantage to make queue depth a bit more
> because it can help to make queue pipeline as full. Also queue depth often
> means how many requests the hardware can queue, and it is a bit different
> with per-queue concurrency.

I'm not really following.  Can you please elaborate?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-03  1:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-01  3:28 [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O Ming Lei
2015-05-01 10:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-01 13:36   ` Ming Lei
2015-05-01 14:22     ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-01 15:05       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-01 15:47         ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-02 15:09           ` Ming Lei
2015-05-02 14:56       ` Ming Lei
2015-05-03  1:52         ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-05-04 12:54           ` Ming Lei

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=20150503015230.GG1949@htj.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jforbes@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.