From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: JeffleXu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
dm-devel@redhat.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block: support to freeze bio based request queue
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:58:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YH6JrTEsYfFA5DQH@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42c79dce-ad99-4e59-6566-727fa08a66bc@linux.alibaba.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 03:21:55PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
>
>
> On 4/19/21 9:50 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 08:05:46PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/15/21 6:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> For bio based request queue, the queue usage refcnt is only grabbed
> >>> during submission, which isn't consistent with request base queue.
> >>>
> >>> Queue freezing has been used widely, and turns out it is very useful
> >>> to quiesce queue activity.
> >>>
> >>> Support to freeze bio based request queue by the following approach:
> >>>
> >>> 1) grab two queue usage refcount for blk-mq before submitting blk-mq
> >>> bio, one is for bio, anther is for request;
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, I can't understand the sense of grabbing two refcounts on the
> >> @q_usage_count of the underlying blk-mq device, while
> >> @q_usage_count of the MD/DM device is kept untouched.
> >
> > Follows the point:
> >
> > 1) for blk-mq, we hold one refcount for bio and another for request, and
> > release one after ending bio or completing request.
>
> Blk-mq has already implemented queue freezing semantics, even without
> this 'grabbing two refcount'. So is this just for the code consisdency
> with the bio-based queue?
Right.
>
>
> >
> > 2) for bio based queue, just holding one refcount for bio, and release it
> > after the bio is ended.
>
> OK.
>
> >
> > As I mentioned to you, the current in-tree code only grabs the refcount
> > during submitting bio for bio base queue, and the refcount is released
> > after returning from submission, see __submit_bio().
>
> Yes. I ignored that the refcount grabbed in the entry of bio submission
> has been returned back when the submission completes for bio-based queue.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In the following calling stack
> >>
> >> ```
> >> queue_poll_store
> >> blk_mq_freeze_queue(q)
> >> ```
> >>
> >> Is the input @q still the request queue of MD/DM device?
> >
> > It can be either one after bio based io polling is supported,
> > queue/io_poll is exposed for both blk-mq and bio based queue.
> >
> > However, I guess bio based polling doesn't need such strict bio queue
> > freezing, cause QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is only read in submission path, so
> > looks current freezing just during submission is enough.
>
> Not actually.
>
> blk_poll(struct request_queue *q, blk_qc_t cookie, bool spin)
> struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
> long state;
>
> - if (!blk_qc_t_valid(cookie) || !blk_queue_poll(q))
> + if (!blk_queue_poll(q) || (queue_is_mq(q) && !blk_qc_t_valid(cookie)))
>
> Here QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is still checked in blk_poll() for bio-based queue,
> at least in your latest patch for bio-based polling.
OK, we can simply drop it.
Thanks,
Ming
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: JeffleXu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
dm-devel@redhat.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block: support to freeze bio based request queue
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:58:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YH6JrTEsYfFA5DQH@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42c79dce-ad99-4e59-6566-727fa08a66bc@linux.alibaba.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 03:21:55PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
>
>
> On 4/19/21 9:50 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 08:05:46PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/15/21 6:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> For bio based request queue, the queue usage refcnt is only grabbed
> >>> during submission, which isn't consistent with request base queue.
> >>>
> >>> Queue freezing has been used widely, and turns out it is very useful
> >>> to quiesce queue activity.
> >>>
> >>> Support to freeze bio based request queue by the following approach:
> >>>
> >>> 1) grab two queue usage refcount for blk-mq before submitting blk-mq
> >>> bio, one is for bio, anther is for request;
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, I can't understand the sense of grabbing two refcounts on the
> >> @q_usage_count of the underlying blk-mq device, while
> >> @q_usage_count of the MD/DM device is kept untouched.
> >
> > Follows the point:
> >
> > 1) for blk-mq, we hold one refcount for bio and another for request, and
> > release one after ending bio or completing request.
>
> Blk-mq has already implemented queue freezing semantics, even without
> this 'grabbing two refcount'. So is this just for the code consisdency
> with the bio-based queue?
Right.
>
>
> >
> > 2) for bio based queue, just holding one refcount for bio, and release it
> > after the bio is ended.
>
> OK.
>
> >
> > As I mentioned to you, the current in-tree code only grabs the refcount
> > during submitting bio for bio base queue, and the refcount is released
> > after returning from submission, see __submit_bio().
>
> Yes. I ignored that the refcount grabbed in the entry of bio submission
> has been returned back when the submission completes for bio-based queue.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In the following calling stack
> >>
> >> ```
> >> queue_poll_store
> >> blk_mq_freeze_queue(q)
> >> ```
> >>
> >> Is the input @q still the request queue of MD/DM device?
> >
> > It can be either one after bio based io polling is supported,
> > queue/io_poll is exposed for both blk-mq and bio based queue.
> >
> > However, I guess bio based polling doesn't need such strict bio queue
> > freezing, cause QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is only read in submission path, so
> > looks current freezing just during submission is enough.
>
> Not actually.
>
> blk_poll(struct request_queue *q, blk_qc_t cookie, bool spin)
> struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
> long state;
>
> - if (!blk_qc_t_valid(cookie) || !blk_queue_poll(q))
> + if (!blk_queue_poll(q) || (queue_is_mq(q) && !blk_qc_t_valid(cookie)))
>
> Here QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is still checked in blk_poll() for bio-based queue,
> at least in your latest patch for bio-based polling.
OK, we can simply drop it.
Thanks,
Ming
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: JeffleXu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
dm-devel@redhat.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block: support to freeze bio based request queue
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 15:58:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YH6JrTEsYfFA5DQH@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <42c79dce-ad99-4e59-6566-727fa08a66bc@linux.alibaba.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 03:21:55PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
>
>
> On 4/19/21 9:50 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 08:05:46PM +0800, JeffleXu wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/15/21 6:33 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> For bio based request queue, the queue usage refcnt is only grabbed
> >>> during submission, which isn't consistent with request base queue.
> >>>
> >>> Queue freezing has been used widely, and turns out it is very useful
> >>> to quiesce queue activity.
> >>>
> >>> Support to freeze bio based request queue by the following approach:
> >>>
> >>> 1) grab two queue usage refcount for blk-mq before submitting blk-mq
> >>> bio, one is for bio, anther is for request;
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, I can't understand the sense of grabbing two refcounts on the
> >> @q_usage_count of the underlying blk-mq device, while
> >> @q_usage_count of the MD/DM device is kept untouched.
> >
> > Follows the point:
> >
> > 1) for blk-mq, we hold one refcount for bio and another for request, and
> > release one after ending bio or completing request.
>
> Blk-mq has already implemented queue freezing semantics, even without
> this 'grabbing two refcount'. So is this just for the code consisdency
> with the bio-based queue?
Right.
>
>
> >
> > 2) for bio based queue, just holding one refcount for bio, and release it
> > after the bio is ended.
>
> OK.
>
> >
> > As I mentioned to you, the current in-tree code only grabs the refcount
> > during submitting bio for bio base queue, and the refcount is released
> > after returning from submission, see __submit_bio().
>
> Yes. I ignored that the refcount grabbed in the entry of bio submission
> has been returned back when the submission completes for bio-based queue.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In the following calling stack
> >>
> >> ```
> >> queue_poll_store
> >> blk_mq_freeze_queue(q)
> >> ```
> >>
> >> Is the input @q still the request queue of MD/DM device?
> >
> > It can be either one after bio based io polling is supported,
> > queue/io_poll is exposed for both blk-mq and bio based queue.
> >
> > However, I guess bio based polling doesn't need such strict bio queue
> > freezing, cause QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is only read in submission path, so
> > looks current freezing just during submission is enough.
>
> Not actually.
>
> blk_poll(struct request_queue *q, blk_qc_t cookie, bool spin)
> struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx;
> long state;
>
> - if (!blk_qc_t_valid(cookie) || !blk_queue_poll(q))
> + if (!blk_queue_poll(q) || (queue_is_mq(q) && !blk_qc_t_valid(cookie)))
>
> Here QUEUE_FLAG_POLL is still checked in blk_poll() for bio-based queue,
> at least in your latest patch for bio-based polling.
OK, we can simply drop it.
Thanks,
Ming
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-20 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-15 10:33 [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/2] block: support to freeze bio based queue Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/2] percpu_ref: add percpu_ref_tryget_many_live Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 19:50 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2021-04-15 19:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-04-15 19:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-04-15 10:33 ` [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/2] block: support to freeze bio based request queue Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 10:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 13:40 ` kernel test robot
2021-04-15 13:56 ` [dm-devel] " Ming Lei
2021-04-15 13:56 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 13:56 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-15 16:30 ` kernel test robot
2021-04-15 20:16 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2021-04-15 20:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-04-15 20:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2021-04-16 1:28 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-16 1:28 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-16 1:28 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-19 12:05 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-19 12:05 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-19 12:05 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-19 13:50 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-19 13:50 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-19 13:50 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-20 7:21 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-20 7:21 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-20 7:21 ` JeffleXu
2021-04-20 7:58 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-04-20 7:58 ` Ming Lei
2021-04-20 7:58 ` Ming Lei
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=YH6JrTEsYfFA5DQH@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=song@kernel.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.