From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
axboe@fb.com, Matias Bjorling <mb@lightnvm.io>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] block: don't decrement nr_phys_segments for physically contigous segments
Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 14:37:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190513123708.GA23671@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190513120344.GA22993@lst.de>
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 02:03:44PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:45:45PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:37:45AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Currently ll_merge_requests_fn, unlike all other merge functions,
> > > reduces nr_phys_segments by one if the last segment of the previous,
> > > and the first segment of the next segement are contigous. While this
> > > seems like a nice solution to avoid building smaller than possible
> >
> > Some workloads need this optimization, please see 729204ef49ec00b
> > ("block: relax check on sg gap"):
>
> And we still allow to merge the segments with this patch. The only
> difference is that these merges do get accounted as extra segments.
Trying mkfs.xfs there were no merges at all, which is expected as
it does perfectly sized direct I/O.
Trying mkfs.ext4 I see lots of bio merges. But for those this patch
nothing changes at all, as we never decrement nr_phys_segments to start
with, we only every did that for request merges, and for those also
only for those on non-gappy devices due to the way the
req_gap_back_merge check was placed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-13 12:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-13 6:37 fix nr_phys_segments vs iterators accounting Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 01/10] block: don't decrement nr_phys_segments for physically contigous segments Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 9:45 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-13 12:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 12:37 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-05-14 4:36 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-14 5:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-14 9:05 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-14 13:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-14 13:57 ` Hannes Reinecke
2019-05-14 14:27 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-14 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-14 14:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 02/10] block: force an unlimited segment size on queues with a virt boundary Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-15 8:19 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 03/10] block: remove the segment size check in bio_will_gap Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-15 8:34 ` Ming Lei
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 04/10] block: remove the bi_seg_{front,back}_size fields in struct bio Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 05/10] block: initialize the write priority in blk_rq_bio_prep Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 7:34 ` Minwoo Im
2019-05-13 15:04 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 06/10] block: remove blk_init_request_from_bio Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 07/10] block: remove the bi_phys_segments field in struct bio Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 08/10] block: simplify blk_recalc_rq_segments Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 09/10] block: untangle the end of blk_bio_segment_split Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 6:37 ` [PATCH 10/10] block: mark blk_rq_bio_prep as inline Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-13 14:57 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
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=20190513123708.GA23671@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@lightnvm.io \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.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.