linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Jack Wang <jack.wang.usish@gmail.com>
Cc: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
	linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [md PATCH 09/14] md/raid10: stop using bi_phys_segments
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:15:21 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d1eh4l6u.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+res+SSS4c1nXo8AE14ku2q_3Bb+w-+XuZOK14SHLACWkHzRw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3404 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 16 2017, Jack Wang wrote:

> 2017-02-16 5:39 GMT+01:00 NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>:
>> raid10 currently repurposes bi_phys_segments on each
>> incoming bio to count how many r10bio was used to encode the
>> request.
>>
>> We need to know when the number of attached r10bio reaches
>> zero to:
>> 1/ call bio_endio() when all IO on the bio is finished
>> 2/ decrement ->nr_pending so that resync IO can proceed.
>>
>> Now that the bio has its own __bi_remaining counter, that
>> can be used instead. We can call bio_inc_remaining to
>> increment the counter and call bio_endio() every time an
>> r10bio completes, rather than only when bi_phys_segments
>> reaches zero.
>>
>> This addresses point 1, but not point 2.  bio_endio()
>> doesn't (and cannot) report when the last r10bio has
>> finished, so a different approach is needed.
>>
>> So: instead of counting bios in ->nr_pending, count r10bios.
>> i.e. every time we attach a bio, increment nr_pending.
>> Every time an r10bio completes, decrement nr_pending.
>>
>> Normally we only increment nr_pending after first checking
>> that ->barrier is zero, or some other non-trivial tests and
>> possible waiting.  When attaching multiple r10bios to a bio,
>> we only need the tests and the waiting once.  After the
>> first increment, subsequent increments can happen
>> unconditionally as they are really all part of the one
>> request.
>>
>> So introduce inc_pending() which can be used when we know
>> that nr_pending is already elevated.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/md/raid10.c |   76 +++++++++++++++++----------------------------------
>>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
>> index 9258cbe233bb..6b4d8643c574 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
>> +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
>> @@ -301,27 +301,18 @@ static void reschedule_retry(struct r10bio *r10_bio)
>>  static void raid_end_bio_io(struct r10bio *r10_bio)
>>  {
>>         struct bio *bio = r10_bio->master_bio;
>> -       int done;
>>         struct r10conf *conf = r10_bio->mddev->private;
>>
>> -       if (bio->bi_phys_segments) {
>> -               unsigned long flags;
>> -               spin_lock_irqsave(&conf->device_lock, flags);
>> -               bio->bi_phys_segments--;
>> -               done = (bio->bi_phys_segments == 0);
>> -               spin_unlock_irqrestore(&conf->device_lock, flags);
>> -       } else
>> -               done = 1;
>>         if (!test_bit(R10BIO_Uptodate, &r10_bio->state))
>>                 bio->bi_error = -EIO;
>> -       if (done) {
>> -               bio_endio(bio);
>> -               /*
>> -                * Wake up any possible resync thread that waits for the device
>> -                * to go idle.
>> -                */
>> -               allow_barrier(conf);
>> -       }
>> +
>> +       /*
>> +        * Wake up any possible resync thread that waits for the device
>> +        * to go idle.
>> +        */
>> +       allow_barrier(conf);
>> +       bio_endio(bio);
>> +
>
> Hi Neil,
>
> Why do you switch the order of above 2 lines, is there a reason
> behind, I notice in raid1 you kept the order?

I cannot think why I would have done that.  It doesn't matter what
order they are in, but it does make sense to leave the order unchanged
unless there is a good reason.  I'll put it back.

Thanks,
NeilBrown


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-17  2:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-16  4:39 [md PATCH 00/14] remove all abuse of bi_phys_segments NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 01/14] md/raid5: use md_write_start to count stripes, not bios NeilBrown
2017-02-16 17:29   ` Shaohua Li
2017-02-17  2:04     ` NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 02/14] md/raid5: simplfy delaying of writes while metadata is updated NeilBrown
2017-02-16 17:37   ` Shaohua Li
2017-02-17  2:10     ` NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 03/14] md/raid5: call bio_endio() directly rather than queueing for later NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 04/14] block: trace completion of all bios NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 05/14] md/raid5: use bio_inc_remaining() instead of repurposing bi_phys_segments as a counter NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 11/14] md/raid5: don't test ->writes_pending in raid5_remove_disk NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 06/14] md/raid5: remove over-loading of ->bi_phys_segments NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 10/14] md/raid1: stop using bi_phys_segment NeilBrown
2017-02-20 10:57   ` Ming Lei
2017-02-21  0:05     ` NeilBrown
2017-02-21  7:41       ` Ming Lei
2017-03-03  0:34         ` NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 07/14] Revert "md/raid5: limit request size according to implementation limits" NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 08/14] md/raid1, raid10: move rXbio accounting closer to allocation NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 09/14] md/raid10: stop using bi_phys_segments NeilBrown
2017-02-16 14:26   ` Jack Wang
2017-02-17  2:15     ` NeilBrown [this message]
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 13/14] md: close a race with setting mddev->in_sync NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 14/14] MD: use per-cpu counter for writes_pending NeilBrown
2017-02-16 20:12   ` Shaohua Li
2017-02-17  2:34     ` NeilBrown
2017-02-16  4:39 ` [md PATCH 12/14] md: factor out set_in_sync() NeilBrown

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=87d1eh4l6u.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
    --to=neilb@suse.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jack.wang.usish@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shli@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).