From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34A28C3F2D1 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 16:32:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 059C62146E for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 16:32:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="FbczPhIc" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 059C62146E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=4ddpW+Nf4t0qLBb/RTmkQqqz1ec2SeO7HrsfVveGN08=; b=FbczPhIcNGDHmQ EcEboyXITQvU9kRxOEyrq1rcuciynv/MPg6FsiXAKdQzfVemS3Pwc5MdqRrSkwbqoFFBimUa5Agmb RQOlEASV4qozUBllN6zYLcIvrzsZ7jl/8tweS7/AkcJVzqzCPAZYuDuc66GPsZ6DI9uQVCC/1JyUj 5mKjGvVtPQLMTjoEcXr0dS/jd2twbkYzxv7tkYngQF9FDa31AtRG4g0LXtib5vqDez0itbY1Ry0HB SZhm2JKYA+yROmgR9SKZ+9U8cinkXAGevXVk98n+BByALY42iLrrTfZA9PGm8UhBKjfANxqpA9eBY ejjPaixIWVTioJIlOPag==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j9Wwh-0000w6-Oy; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 16:32:31 +0000 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1j9WwY-0000lO-Jm for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 16:32:28 +0000 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 7ECF068B20; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 17:32:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 17:32:20 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Max Gurtovoy Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvmet-rdma: allocate RW ctxs according to mdts Message-ID: <20200304163220.GC11846@lst.de> References: <20200304153935.101063-1-maxg@mellanox.com> <20200304153935.101063-3-maxg@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200304153935.101063-3-maxg@mellanox.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200304_083222_844819_89A84BDD X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 8.01 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: sagi@grimberg.me, Chaitanya.Kulkarni@wdc.com, bharat@chelsio.com, nirranjan@chelsio.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, krishna2@chelsio.com, jgg@mellanox.com, kbusch@kernel.org, hch@lst.de Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 05:39:35PM +0200, Max Gurtovoy wrote: > Current nvmet-rdma code allocates MR pool budget based on queue size, > assuming both host and target use the same "max_pages_per_mr" count. > After limiting the mdts value for RDMA controllers, we know the factor > of maximum MR's per IO operation. Thus, make sure MR pool will be > sufficient for the required IO depth and IO size. > > That is, say host's SQ size is 100, then the MR pool budget allocated > currently at target will also be 100 MRs. But 100 IO WRITE Requests > with 256 sg_count(IO size above 1MB) require 200 MRs when target's > "max_pages_per_mr" is 128. Looks good, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ linux-nvme mailing list linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme