public inbox for linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guoqing Jiang <jgq516@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: song@kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/8] md: add io accounting for raid0 and raid5
Date: Fri, 28 May 2021 17:20:35 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1e491df0-4dff-f4b1-9d9d-e3c9c90dac74@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YK+56xtF7VoZexoa@infradead.org>



On 5/27/21 11:25 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

>   
>   	pr_debug("md: data integrity enabled on %s\n", mdname(mddev));
> -	if (bioset_integrity_create(&mddev->bio_set, BIO_POOL_SIZE)) {
> +	if (bioset_integrity_create(&mddev->bio_set, BIO_POOL_SIZE) ||
> +	    bioset_integrity_create(&mddev->io_acct_set, BIO_POOL_SIZE)) {
> Don't we need to create this new only for raid0 and raid5?
> Shouldn't they call helpers to create it?

Good catch, will add a check for level.

>> @@ -5864,6 +5866,12 @@ int md_run(struct mddev *mddev)
>>   		if (err)
>>   			return err;
>>   	}
>> +	if (!bioset_initialized(&mddev->io_acct_set)) {
>> +		err = bioset_init(&mddev->io_acct_set, BIO_POOL_SIZE,
>> +				  offsetof(struct md_io_acct, bio_clone), 0);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>> +	}
> Can someone explain why we are having these bioset_initialized checks
> here (also for the existing one)?  This just smells like very sloppy
> life time rules.

My understanding is that md_run is not only called when array is
created/assembled, for example, it can also be called in md_ioctl,
which means you can't call bioset_init unconditionally. Others may
have better explanation.

BTW, besides md, dm is another user of bioset_initialized.

>> +/* used by personalities (raid0 and raid5) to account io stats */
> Instead of mentioning the personalities this migt better explain
> something like ".. by personalities that don't already clone the
> bio and thus can't easily add the timestamp to their extended bio
> structure"

Ok, thanks for rephrasing.

>> +void md_account_bio(struct mddev *mddev, struct bio **bio)
>> +{
>> +	struct md_io_acct *md_io_acct;
>> +	struct bio *clone;
>> +
>> +	if (!blk_queue_io_stat((*bio)->bi_bdev->bd_disk->queue))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	clone = bio_clone_fast(*bio, GFP_NOIO, &mddev->io_acct_set);
>> +	md_io_acct = container_of(clone, struct md_io_acct, bio_clone);
>> +	md_io_acct->orig_bio = *bio;
>> +	md_io_acct->start_time = bio_start_io_acct(*bio);
>> +
>> +	clone->bi_end_io = md_end_io_acct;
>> +	clone->bi_private = md_io_acct;
>> +	*bio = clone;
> I would find a calling conventions that returns the allocated clone
> (or the original bio if there is no accounting) more logical.

Not sure if I follow, do you want the function return "struct bio *"
instead of "void"? I don't think there is fundamental difference
with current behavior.

>> +	struct bio_set			io_acct_set; /* for raid0 and raid5 io accounting */
> crazy long line.

At lease it aligns with above line and checkpatch doesn't complain
either.

Thanks,
Guoqing

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-28  9:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-25  9:46 [PATCH V3 0/6] md: io stats accounting Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 1/8] md: revert " Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 2/8] md: add io accounting for raid0 and raid5 Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-26  6:32   ` Song Liu
2021-05-26  7:53     ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-26 16:00       ` Song Liu
2021-05-27  2:00         ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-27  6:14           ` Song Liu
2021-05-27  6:33             ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-27 15:25   ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-28  9:20     ` Guoqing Jiang [this message]
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 3/8] md/raid5: move checking badblock before clone bio in raid5_read_one_chunk Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 4/8] md/raid5: avoid redundant bio clone " Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 5/8] md/raid1: rename print_msg with r1bio_existed Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 6/8] md/raid1: enable io accounting Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 7/8] md/raid10: " Guoqing Jiang
2021-05-25  9:46 ` [PATCH V3 8/8] md: mark some personalities as deprecated Guoqing Jiang
2021-06-01  1:19 ` [Update PATCH V3 2/8] md: add io accounting for raid0 and raid5 Guoqing Jiang
2021-06-03  1:17   ` Guoqing Jiang
2021-06-03  6:54     ` Song Liu

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=1e491df0-4dff-f4b1-9d9d-e3c9c90dac74@gmail.com \
    --to=jgq516@gmail.com \
    --cc=artur.paszkiewicz@intel.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox