linux-ide.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-ide <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2]block: optimize non-queueable flush request drive
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 10:23:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110503082321.GA6556@htj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1304405071.3828.11.camel@sli10-conroe>

Hello,

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 02:44:31PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > As I've said several times already, I really don't like this magic
> > being done in the completion path.  Can't you detect the condition on
> > issue of the second/following flush and append it to the running list?
>
> hmm, don't understand it. blk_flush_complete_seq is called when the
> second flush is issued. or do you mean do this when the second flush is
> issued to disk? but when the second flush is issued the first flush is
> already finished.

Ah, okay, my bad.  That's the next sequence logic, so the right place.
Still, please do the followings.

* Put it in a separate patch.

* Preferably, detect the actual condition (back to back flush) rather
  than the queueability test unless it's too complicated.

* Please make pending/running paths look more symmetrical.

> > If you already have tried that but this way still seems better, can
> > you please explain why?
> > 
> > Also, this is a separate logic.  Please put it in a separate patch.
> > The first patch should implement queue holding while flushing, which
> > should remove the regression, right?
>
> ok. holding queue has no performance gain in my test, but it reduced a
> lot of request requeue.

No, holding the queue should remove the regression completely.  Please
read on.

> > Hmmm... why do you need separate ->flush_exclusive_running?  Doesn't
> > pending_idx != running_idx already have the same information?
>
> when pending_idx != running_idx, flush request is added into queue tail,
> but this doesn't mean flush request is dispatched to disk. there might
> be other requests in the queue head, which we should dispatch. And flush
> request might be reqeueud. Just checking pending_idx != running_idx will
> cause queue hang because we thought flush is dispatched and then hold
> the queue, but actually flush isn't dispatched yet, the queue should
> dispatch other normal requests.

Don't hold elv_next_request().  Hold ->elevator_dispatch_fn().

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-03  8:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-19  8:44 [PATCH 1/2]block: optimize non-queueable flush request drive Shaohua Li
2011-04-22 23:32 ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-25  1:33   ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-25  8:58     ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-25  9:13       ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-26  0:46         ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-26 10:48           ` Tejun Heo
2011-04-28  7:50             ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-30 14:37               ` Tejun Heo
2011-05-03  6:44                 ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-03  8:23                   ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2011-05-04  6:20                     ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-26  0:42       ` Shaohua Li
2011-04-26 10:40         ` Tejun Heo

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=20110503082321.GA6556@htj.dyndns.org \
    --to=htejun@gmail.com \
    --cc=djwong@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.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).