linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.

  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).