From: "Lennart Sorensen" <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
To: The development of GNU GRUB <grub-devel@gnu.org>
Cc: dab@hp.com, scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com
Subject: Re: Best practice for new linux block driver device naming?
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:49:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130308224911.GB11989@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130308223428.GL28545@beardog.cce.hp.com>
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 04:34:28PM -0600, scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com wrote:
> I get ~4x the IOPSs with a block driver vs. scsi driver due to contention
> for locks in the scsi mid layer (in scsi_request_fn). It's the
> difference between the device being worth manufacturing vs. not.
Well that starts to qualify as a good reason I suppose. Of course it
also makes you wonder if perhaps some work on optimizing that part of
the scsi stack is oin order (I have no idea if that's even plausible).
> See this thread: http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=135518042125008&w=2
>
> Driver is similar to nvme (also a new block driver), but this one is
> for SCSI over PCIe, basically highly parallelized access to very low
> latency devices and trying to use the SCSI midlayer kills the IOPS.
Some nifty hardware that's for sure.
> There were reasons back then for doing that one as a block driver
> which are no longer extant (hence the existence of the hpsa driver
> which supplanted cciss for new smart array devices.)
>
> All other things being equal, I would also prefer a scsi driver.
> Heck, it's called SCSI over PCIe -- I tried like hell to get it
> to perform adequately as a SCSI driver but all other things are
> not equal, not even close, the block driver was ~4x as fast.
>
> So we reluctantly go with a block driver, just like nvme did.
Makes sense. Perhaps that does mean having to teach grub about it then.
--
Len Sorensen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-08 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-08 20:07 Best practice for new linux block driver device naming? scameron
2013-03-08 21:56 ` Lennart Sorensen
2013-03-08 22:34 ` scameron
2013-03-08 22:49 ` Lennart Sorensen [this message]
2013-03-08 23:05 ` scameron
2013-03-11 18:35 ` Lennart Sorensen
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=20130308224911.GB11989@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
--to=lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca \
--cc=dab@hp.com \
--cc=grub-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=scameron@beardog.cce.hp.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).