From: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
To: daejun7.park@samsung.com
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
avri.altman@wdc.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, asutoshd@codeaurora.org,
stanley.chu@mediatek.com, bvanassche@acm.org, huobean@gmail.com,
ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
JinHwan Park <jh.i.park@samsung.com>,
Javier Gonzalez <javier.gonz@samsung.com>,
SEUNGUK SHIN <seunguk.shin@samsung.com>,
Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@samsung.com>,
Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@samsung.com>,
BoRam Shin <boram.shin@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 4/4] scsi: ufs: Add HPB 2.0 support
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 10:45:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <79aea8a80c1be2ff7f05683c2f4918ce@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210317014253epcms2p1f45db6a281645282e1540e0070999d73@epcms2p1>
On 2021-03-17 09:42, Daejun Park wrote:
>> On 2021-03-15 15:23, Can Guo wrote:
>>> On 2021-03-15 15:07, Daejun Park wrote:
>>>>>> This patch supports the HPB 2.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The HPB 2.0 supports read of varying sizes from 4KB to 512KB.
>>>>>> In the case of Read (<= 32KB) is supported as single HPB read.
>>>>>> In the case of Read (36KB ~ 512KB) is supported by as a
>>>>>> combination
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> write buffer command and HPB read command to deliver more PPN.
>>>>>> The write buffer commands may not be issued immediately due to
>>>>>> busy
>>>>>> tags.
>>>>>> To use HPB read more aggressively, the driver can requeue the
>>>>>> write
>>>>>> buffer
>>>>>> command. The requeue threshold is implemented as timeout and can
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> modified with requeue_timeout_ms entry in sysfs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daejun Park <daejun7.park@samsung.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> +static struct attribute *hpb_dev_param_attrs[] = {
>>>>>> + &dev_attr_requeue_timeout_ms.attr,
>>>>>> + NULL,
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +struct attribute_group ufs_sysfs_hpb_param_group = {
>>>>>> + .name = "hpb_param_sysfs",
>>>>>> + .attrs = hpb_dev_param_attrs,
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int ufshpb_pre_req_mempool_init(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct ufshpb_req *pre_req = NULL;
>>>>>> + int qd = hpb->sdev_ufs_lu->queue_depth / 2;
>>>>>> + int i, j;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hpb->lh_pre_req_free);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + hpb->pre_req = kcalloc(qd, sizeof(struct ufshpb_req),
>>>>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>> + hpb->throttle_pre_req = qd;
>>>>>> + hpb->num_inflight_pre_req = 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (!hpb->pre_req)
>>>>>> + goto release_mem;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < qd; i++) {
>>>>>> + pre_req = hpb->pre_req + i;
>>>>>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pre_req->list_req);
>>>>>> + pre_req->req = NULL;
>>>>>> + pre_req->bio = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't prepare bio as same as wb.m_page? Won't that save more
>>>>> time
>>>>> for ufshpb_issue_pre_req()?
>>>>
>>>> It is pre_req pool. So although we prepare bio at this time, it just
>>>> only for first pre_req.
>>>
>>> I meant removing the bio_alloc() in ufshpb_issue_pre_req() and
>>> bio_put()
>>> in ufshpb_pre_req_compl_fn(). bios, in pre_req's case, just hold a
>>> page.
>>> So, prepare 16 (if queue depth is 32) bios here, just use them along
>>> with
>>> wb.m_page and call bio_reset() in ufshpb_pre_req_compl_fn(). Shall it
>>> work?
>>>
>>
>> If it works, you can even have the bio_add_pc_page() called here.
>> Later
>> in
>> ufshpb_execute_pre_req(), you don't need to call
>> ufshpb_pre_req_add_bio_page(),
>> just call ufshpb_prep_entry() once instead - it save many repeated
>> steps
>> for a
>> pre_req, and you don't even need to call bio_reset() in this case,
>> since
>> for a
>> bio, nothing changes after it is binded with a specific page...
>
> Hi, Can Guo
>
> I tried the idea that you suggested, but it doesn't work properly.
> This optimization should be done next time for enhancement.
Can you elaborate please? Any error seen?
Per my understanding, in the case for pre_reqs, a bio is no different
from a page. Here it can reserve 16 pages for later use, which can be
done the same for bios.
This is not an enhancement, but a doubt - why not? Unless it is not
doable.
Thanks,
Can Guo.
>
> Thanks
> Daejun
>
>> Can Guo.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Can Guo.
>>>
>>>> After use it, it should be prepared bio at issue phase.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Daejun
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Can Guo.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + pre_req->wb.m_page = alloc_page(GFP_KERNEL |
>>>>>> __GFP_ZERO);
>>>>>> + if (!pre_req->wb.m_page) {
>>>>>> + for (j = 0; j < i; j++)
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> __free_page(hpb->pre_req[j].wb.m_page);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + goto release_mem;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + list_add_tail(&pre_req->list_req,
>>>>>> &hpb->lh_pre_req_free);
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>> +release_mem:
>>>>>> + kfree(hpb->pre_req);
>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-17 2:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20210315012850epcms2p361447b689e925561c48aa9ca54434eb5@epcms2p3>
2021-03-15 1:28 ` [PATCH v29 0/4] scsi: ufs: Add Host Performance Booster Support Daejun Park
2021-03-15 1:29 ` [PATCH v29 1/4] scsi: ufs: Introduce HPB feature Daejun Park
2021-03-15 1:30 ` [PATCH v29 2/4] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read Daejun Park
2021-03-15 1:30 ` [PATCH v29 3/4] scsi: ufs: Prepare HPB read for cached sub-region Daejun Park
2021-03-15 1:31 ` [PATCH v29 4/4] scsi: ufs: Add HPB 2.0 support Daejun Park
2021-03-15 5:05 ` Can Guo
2021-03-15 7:07 ` Daejun Park
2021-03-15 7:23 ` Can Guo
2021-03-15 7:47 ` Can Guo
2021-03-17 1:42 ` Daejun Park
2021-03-17 2:45 ` Can Guo [this message]
2021-03-18 2:02 ` Daejun Park
2021-03-18 2:25 ` Can Guo
2021-03-18 2:29 ` Daejun Park
2021-03-18 4:49 ` Can Guo
2021-03-18 7:13 ` Daejun Park
2021-03-15 6:36 ` Can Guo
2021-03-21 10:05 ` Avri Altman
2021-03-22 0:50 ` Daejun Park
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=79aea8a80c1be2ff7f05683c2f4918ce@codeaurora.org \
--to=cang@codeaurora.org \
--cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
--cc=asutoshd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
--cc=boram.shin@samsung.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=daejun7.park@samsung.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=huobean@gmail.com \
--cc=j-young.choi@samsung.com \
--cc=javier.gonz@samsung.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jh.i.park@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=seunguk.shin@samsung.com \
--cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
--cc=sungjun07.park@samsung.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.