From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
hch@lst.de
Subject: bio-based DM multipath is back from the dead [was: Re: Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM]
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:38:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160526023855.GA20659@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461858038.2307.16.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On Thu, Apr 28 2016 at 11:40am -0400,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 08:11 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > Full disclosure: I'll be looking at reinstating bio-based DM multipath to
> > regain efficiencies that now really matter when issuing IO to extremely
> > fast devices (e.g. NVMe). bio cloning is now very cheap (due to
> > immutable biovecs), coupled with the emerging multipage biovec work that
> > will help construct larger bios, so I think it is worth pursuing to at
> > least keep our options open.
Please see the 4 topmost commits I've published here:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/log/?h=dm-4.8
All request-based DM multipath support/advances have been completly
preserved. I've just made it so that we can now have bio-based DM
multipath too.
All of the various modes have been tested using mptest:
https://github.com/snitm/mptest
> OK, but remember the reason we moved from bio to request was partly to
> be nearer to the device but also because at that time requests were
> accumulations of bios which had to be broken out, go back up the stack
> individually and be re-elevated, which adds to the inefficiency. In
> theory the bio splitting work will mean that we only have one or two
> split bios per request (because they were constructed from a split up
> huge bio), but when we send them back to the top to be reconstructed as
> requests there's no guarantee that the split will be correct a second
> time around and we might end up resplitting the already split bios. If
> you do reassembly into the huge bio again before resend down the next
> queue, that's starting to look like quite a lot of work as well.
I've not even delved into the level you're laser-focused on here.
But I'm struggling to grasp why multipath is any different than any
other bio-based device...
FYI, the paper I reference in my "dm mpath: reinstate bio-based support"
commit gets into what I've always thought the real justification was for
the transition from bio-based to request-based.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-26 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-27 23:39 Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM James Bottomley
2016-04-28 12:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-28 15:40 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 15:53 ` [Lsf] " Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 16:19 ` Knight, Frederick
2016-04-28 16:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 17:33 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 16:23 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-28 16:41 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 16:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:51 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-30 0:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-30 0:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 18:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-02 19:28 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 22:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-03 17:44 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-26 2:38 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2016-05-27 8:39 ` bio-based DM multipath is back from the dead [was: Re: Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM] Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 8:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 14:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-05-27 15:42 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 15:42 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 16:10 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-29 16:45 ` [dm-devel] Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM Benjamin Marzinski
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=20160526023855.GA20659@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf@lists.linux-foundation.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.