public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] scsi: use host wide tags by default
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 14:46:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1429307160.1079.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55317EAE.10201@kernel.dk>

On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 15:44 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 04/17/2015 03:42 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> >> @@ -662,32 +662,14 @@ void scsi_finish_command(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> >>    */
> >>   int scsi_change_queue_depth(struct scsi_device *sdev, int depth)
> >>   {
> >> -	unsigned long flags;
> >> -
> >> -	if (depth <= 0)
> >> -		goto out;
> >> -
> >> -	spin_lock_irqsave(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock, flags);
> >> +	if (depth > 0) {
> >> +		unsigned long flags;
> >>
> >> -	/*
> >> -	 * Check to see if the queue is managed by the block layer.
> >> -	 * If it is, and we fail to adjust the depth, exit.
> >> -	 *
> >> -	 * Do not resize the tag map if it is a host wide share bqt,
> >> -	 * because the size should be the hosts's can_queue. If there
> >> -	 * is more IO than the LLD's can_queue (so there are not enuogh
> >> -	 * tags) request_fn's host queue ready check will handle it.
> >> -	 */
> >> -	if (!shost_use_blk_mq(sdev->host) && !sdev->host->bqt) {
> >> -		if (blk_queue_tagged(sdev->request_queue) &&
> >> -		    blk_queue_resize_tags(sdev->request_queue, depth) != 0)
> >> -			goto out_unlock;
> >> +		spin_lock_irqsave(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock, flags);
> >> +		sdev->queue_depth = depth;
> >> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock, flags);
> >
> > This lock/unlock is a nasty global sync point which can be eliminated:
> > we can rely on the architectural atomicity of 32 bit writes (might need
> > to make sdev->queue_depth a u32 because I seem to remember 16 bit writes
> > had to be done as two byte stores on some architectures).
> 
> It's not in a hot path (by any stretch), so doesn't really matter...

Sure, but it's good practise not to do this, otherwise the pattern
lock/u32 store/unlock gets duplicated into hot paths by people who are
confused about whether locking is required.

James



  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-17 21:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-17 20:11 [PATCH, RFC] scsi: use host wide tags by default Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 21:42 ` James Bottomley
2015-04-17 21:44   ` Jens Axboe
2015-04-17 21:46     ` James Bottomley [this message]
2015-04-17 21:47       ` Jens Axboe
2015-04-17 21:57         ` James Bottomley
2015-04-17 22:07           ` Jens Axboe
2015-04-17 22:20             ` James Bottomley
2015-04-17 22:40               ` Jens Axboe
2015-04-20 18:07                 ` James Bottomley
2015-04-18  4:05   ` Elliott, Robert (Server Storage)
2015-04-18  9:05   ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-17 21:43 ` Jens Axboe

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=1429307160.1079.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
    --to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.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