From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
hch@lst.de
Subject: bio-based DM multipath is back from the dead [was: Re: Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM]
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 22:38:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160526023855.GA20659@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461858038.2307.16.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On Thu, Apr 28 2016 at 11:40am -0400,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-04-28 at 08:11 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > Full disclosure: I'll be looking at reinstating bio-based DM multipath to
> > regain efficiencies that now really matter when issuing IO to extremely
> > fast devices (e.g. NVMe). bio cloning is now very cheap (due to
> > immutable biovecs), coupled with the emerging multipage biovec work that
> > will help construct larger bios, so I think it is worth pursuing to at
> > least keep our options open.
Please see the 4 topmost commits I've published here:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git/log/?h=dm-4.8
All request-based DM multipath support/advances have been completly
preserved. I've just made it so that we can now have bio-based DM
multipath too.
All of the various modes have been tested using mptest:
https://github.com/snitm/mptest
> OK, but remember the reason we moved from bio to request was partly to
> be nearer to the device but also because at that time requests were
> accumulations of bios which had to be broken out, go back up the stack
> individually and be re-elevated, which adds to the inefficiency. In
> theory the bio splitting work will mean that we only have one or two
> split bios per request (because they were constructed from a split up
> huge bio), but when we send them back to the top to be reconstructed as
> requests there's no guarantee that the split will be correct a second
> time around and we might end up resplitting the already split bios. If
> you do reassembly into the huge bio again before resend down the next
> queue, that's starting to look like quite a lot of work as well.
I've not even delved into the level you're laser-focused on here.
But I'm struggling to grasp why multipath is any different than any
other bio-based device...
FYI, the paper I reference in my "dm mpath: reinstate bio-based support"
commit gets into what I've always thought the real justification was for
the transition from bio-based to request-based.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-26 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-27 23:39 Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM James Bottomley
2016-04-28 12:11 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-28 15:40 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 15:53 ` [Lsf] " Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 16:19 ` Knight, Frederick
2016-04-28 16:37 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 17:33 ` James Bottomley
2016-04-28 16:23 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-28 16:41 ` [dm-devel] " Bart Van Assche
2016-04-28 16:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-29 21:51 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-04-30 0:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-04-30 0:47 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 18:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-02 19:28 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-02 22:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-05-03 17:44 ` Laurence Oberman
2016-05-26 2:38 ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2016-05-27 8:39 ` bio-based DM multipath is back from the dead [was: Re: Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM] Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 14:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-05-27 15:42 ` Hannes Reinecke
2016-05-27 16:10 ` Mike Snitzer
2016-04-29 16:45 ` [dm-devel] Notes from the four separate IO track sessions at LSF/MM Benjamin Marzinski
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=20160526023855.GA20659@redhat.com \
--to=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf@lists.linux-foundation.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).