public inbox for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, joshi.k@samsung.com,
	Pankaj Raghav <pankydev8@gmail.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] block: enable batched allocation for blk_mq_alloc_request()
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2022 10:22:18 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4e9ae1d2-1db4-aff6-e280-6ea282161b7b@opensource.wdc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba0b3ae4-7001-af42-3549-cc52049ccccb@kernel.dk>

On 9/24/22 10:01, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 9/23/22 6:59 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 9/24/22 05:54, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 9/23/22 9:13 AM, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
>>>> On 2022-09-23 16:52, Pankaj Raghav wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 12:28:01PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>> The filesystem IO path can take advantage of allocating batches of
>>>>>> requests, if the underlying submitter tells the block layer about it
>>>>>> through the blk_plug. For passthrough IO, the exported API is the
>>>>>> blk_mq_alloc_request() helper, and that one does not allow for
>>>>>> request caching.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wire up request caching for blk_mq_alloc_request(), which is generally
>>>>>> done without having a bio available upfront.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  block/blk-mq.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think we need this patch to ensure correct behaviour for passthrough:
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
>>>>> index c11949d66163..840541c1ab40 100644
>>>>> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
>>>>> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
>>>>> @@ -1213,7 +1213,7 @@ void blk_execute_rq_nowait(struct request *rq, bool at_head)
>>>>>         WARN_ON(!blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq));
>>>>>  
>>>>>         blk_account_io_start(rq);
>>>>> -       if (current->plug)
>>>>> +       if (blk_mq_plug(rq->bio))
>>>>>                 blk_add_rq_to_plug(current->plug, rq);
>>>>>         else
>>>>>                 blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, at_head, true, false);
>>>>>
>>>>> As the passthrough path can now support request caching via blk_mq_alloc_request(),
>>>>> and it uses blk_execute_rq_nowait(), bad things can happen at least for zoned
>>>>> devices:
>>>>>
>>>>> static inline struct blk_plug *blk_mq_plug( struct bio *bio)
>>>>> {
>>>>> 	/* Zoned block device write operation case: do not plug the BIO */
>>>>> 	if (bdev_is_zoned(bio->bi_bdev) && op_is_write(bio_op(bio)))
>>>>> 		return NULL;
>>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> Thinking more about it, even this will not fix it because op is
>>>> REQ_OP_DRV_OUT if it is a NVMe write for passthrough requests.
>>>>
>>>> @Damien Should the condition in blk_mq_plug() be changed to:
>>>>
>>>> static inline struct blk_plug *blk_mq_plug( struct bio *bio)
>>>> {
>>>> 	/* Zoned block device write operation case: do not plug the BIO */
>>>> 	if (bdev_is_zoned(bio->bi_bdev) && !op_is_read(bio_op(bio)))
>>>> 		return NULL;
>>>
>>> That looks reasonable to me. It'll prevent plug optimizations even
>>> for passthrough on zoned devices, but that's probably fine.
>>
>> Could do:
>>
>> 	if (blk_op_is_passthrough(bio_op(bio)) ||
>> 	    (bdev_is_zoned(bio->bi_bdev) && op_is_write(bio_op(bio))))
>> 		return NULL;
>>
>> Which I think is way cleaner. No ?
>> Unless you want to preserve plugging with passthrough commands on regular
>> (not zoned) drives ?
> 
> We most certainly do, without plugging this whole patchset is not
> functional. Nor is batched dispatch, for example.

OK. Then the change to !op_is_read() is fine then.

> 

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research



  reply	other threads:[~2022-09-24  1:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-22 18:28 [PATCHSET 0/5] Enable alloc caching and batched freeing for passthrough Jens Axboe
2022-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH 1/5] block: enable batched allocation for blk_mq_alloc_request() Jens Axboe
2022-09-23 14:52   ` Pankaj Raghav
2022-09-23 15:13     ` Pankaj Raghav
2022-09-23 20:54       ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-24  0:59         ` Damien Le Moal
2022-09-24  1:01           ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-24  1:22             ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2022-09-24 11:56         ` Pankaj Raghav
2022-09-24 14:44           ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH 2/5] block: change request end_io handler to pass back a return value Jens Axboe
2022-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH 3/5] block: allow end_io based requests in the completion batch handling Jens Axboe
2022-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH 4/5] nvme: split out metadata vs non metadata end_io uring_cmd completions Jens Axboe
2022-09-23 15:21   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-23 20:52     ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-26 14:41       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-26 14:41         ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-26 14:43           ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-26 14:50             ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-26 14:52               ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-26 14:54                 ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-22 18:28 ` [PATCH 5/5] nvme: enable batched completions of passthrough IO Jens Axboe
2022-09-23 15:16 ` [PATCHSET 0/5] Enable alloc caching and batched freeing for passthrough Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-23 15:19   ` Jens Axboe
2022-09-23 15:21     ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-09-23 15:22       ` Jens Axboe
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-09-27  1:44 [PATCHSET v2 " Jens Axboe
2022-09-27  1:44 ` [PATCH 1/5] block: enable batched allocation for blk_mq_alloc_request() Jens Axboe
2022-09-28 13:38   ` Anuj gupta

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=4e9ae1d2-1db4-aff6-e280-6ea282161b7b@opensource.wdc.com \
    --to=damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=joshi.k@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=p.raghav@samsung.com \
    --cc=pankydev8@gmail.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