From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@gmail.com>
Cc: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] More async operations for file systems - async discard?
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 08:09:48 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190217210948.GB14116@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92ab41f7-35bc-0f56-056f-ed88526b8ea4@gmail.com>
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 03:36:10PM -0500, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> One proposal for btrfs was that we should look at getting discard
> out of the synchronous path in order to minimize the slowdown
> associated with enabling discard at mount time. Seems like an
> obvious win for "hint" like operations like discard.
We already have support for that. blkdev_issue_discard() is
synchornous, yes, but __blkdev_issue_discard() will only build the
discard bio chain - it is up to the caller to submit and wait for it.
Some callers (XFS, dm-thinp, nvmet, etc) use a bio completion to
handle the discard IO completion, hence allowing async dispatch and
processing of the discard chain without blocking the caller. Others
(like ext4) simply call submit_bio_wait() to do wait synchronously
on completion of the discard bio chain.
> I do wonder where we stand now with the cost of the various discard
> commands - how painful is it for modern SSD's?
AIUI, it still depends on the SSD implementation, unfortunately.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-17 21:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-17 20:36 [LSF/MM TOPIC] More async operations for file systems - async discard? Ric Wheeler
2019-02-17 21:09 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2019-02-17 23:42 ` Ric Wheeler
2019-02-18 2:22 ` Dave Chinner
2019-02-18 22:30 ` Ric Wheeler
2019-02-20 23:47 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-21 20:08 ` Dave Chinner
2019-02-21 23:55 ` Jeff Mahoney
2019-02-22 3:01 ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-02-22 6:15 ` Roman Mamedov
2019-02-22 14:12 ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-02-22 2:51 ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-02-22 16:45 ` Keith Busch
2019-02-27 11:40 ` Ric Wheeler
2019-02-27 13:24 ` Matthew Wilcox
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=20190217210948.GB14116@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ricwheeler@gmail.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.