public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>
Cc: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	"James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com" 
	<James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: Perfromance drop on SCSI hard disk
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 16:47:31 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305794851.22968.161.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305793580.22968.155.camel@debian>

On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 16:26 +0800, Alex,Shi wrote:
> > I will queue up the combined patch, it looks fine from here as well.
> > 
> 
> When I have some time to study Jens and shaohua's patch today. I find a
> simpler way to resolved the re-enter issue on starved_list. Following
> Jens' idea, we can just put the starved_list device into kblockd if it
> come from __scsi_queue_insert(). 
> It can resolve the re-enter issue and recover performance totally, and
> need not a work_struct in every scsi_device. The logic/code also looks a
> bit simpler. 
> What's your opinion of this? 

BTW, Jens, this patch is against on latest kernel, 2.6.39. 
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> index ec1803a..de7c569 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ struct kmem_cache *scsi_sdb_cache;
>   */
>  #define SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY	3
>  
> +static void scsi_run_queue_async(struct request_queue *q);
> +
>  /*
>   * Function:	scsi_unprep_request()
>   *
> @@ -159,7 +161,7 @@ static int __scsi_queue_insert(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd, int reason, int unbusy)
>  	blk_requeue_request(q, cmd->request);
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
>  
> -	kblockd_schedule_work(q, &device->requeue_work);
> +	scsi_run_queue_async(q);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -395,7 +397,7 @@ static inline int scsi_host_is_busy(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
>   * Notes:	The previous command was completely finished, start
>   *		a new one if possible.
>   */
> -static void scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q)
> +static void __scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q, bool async)
>  {
>  	struct scsi_device *sdev = q->queuedata;
>  	struct Scsi_Host *shost;
> @@ -435,30 +437,35 @@ static void scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>  				       &shost->starved_list);
>  			continue;
>  		}
> -
> -		spin_unlock(shost->host_lock);
> -		spin_lock(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock);
> -		__blk_run_queue(sdev->request_queue);
> -		spin_unlock(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock);
> -		spin_lock(shost->host_lock);
> +		if (async)
> +			blk_run_queue_async(sdev->request_queue);
> +		else {
> +			spin_unlock(shost->host_lock);
> +			spin_lock(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock);
> +			__blk_run_queue(sdev->request_queue);
> +			spin_unlock(sdev->request_queue->queue_lock);
> +			spin_lock(shost->host_lock);
> +		}
>  	}
>  	/* put any unprocessed entries back */
>  	list_splice(&starved_list, &shost->starved_list);
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(shost->host_lock, flags);
>  
> -	blk_run_queue(q);
> +	if (async)
> +		blk_run_queue_async(q);
> +	else
> +		blk_run_queue(q);
>  }
>  
> -void scsi_requeue_run_queue(struct work_struct *work)
> +static void scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
> -	struct scsi_device *sdev;
> -	struct request_queue *q;
> -
> -	sdev = container_of(work, struct scsi_device, requeue_work);
> -	q = sdev->request_queue;
> -	scsi_run_queue(q);
> +	__scsi_run_queue(q, false);
>  }
>  
> +static void scsi_run_queue_async(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
> +	__scsi_run_queue(q, true);
> +}
>  /*
>   * Function:	scsi_requeue_command()
>   *
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> index 58584dc..087821f 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_scan.c
> @@ -242,7 +242,6 @@ static struct scsi_device *scsi_alloc_sdev(struct scsi_target *starget,
>  	int display_failure_msg = 1, ret;
>  	struct Scsi_Host *shost = dev_to_shost(starget->dev.parent);
>  	extern void scsi_evt_thread(struct work_struct *work);
> -	extern void scsi_requeue_run_queue(struct work_struct *work);
>  
>  	sdev = kzalloc(sizeof(*sdev) + shost->transportt->device_size,
>  		       GFP_ATOMIC);
> @@ -265,7 +264,6 @@ static struct scsi_device *scsi_alloc_sdev(struct scsi_target *starget,
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sdev->event_list);
>  	spin_lock_init(&sdev->list_lock);
>  	INIT_WORK(&sdev->event_work, scsi_evt_thread);
> -	INIT_WORK(&sdev->requeue_work, scsi_requeue_run_queue);
>  
>  	sdev->sdev_gendev.parent = get_device(&starget->dev);
>  	sdev->sdev_target = starget;
> diff --git a/include/scsi/scsi_device.h b/include/scsi/scsi_device.h
> index dd82e02..2d3ec50 100644
> --- a/include/scsi/scsi_device.h
> +++ b/include/scsi/scsi_device.h
> @@ -169,7 +169,6 @@ struct scsi_device {
>  				sdev_dev;
>  
>  	struct execute_work	ew; /* used to get process context on put */
> -	struct work_struct	requeue_work;
>  
>  	struct scsi_dh_data	*scsi_dh_data;
>  	enum scsi_device_state sdev_state;
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2011-05-19  8:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-10  6:40 Perfromance drop on SCSI hard disk Alex,Shi
2011-05-10  6:52 ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-12  0:36   ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-12 20:29 ` Jens Axboe
2011-05-13  0:11   ` Alex,Shi
2011-05-13  0:48   ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-13  3:01     ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-16  8:04       ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-16  8:37         ` Alex,Shi
2011-05-17  6:09           ` Alex,Shi
2011-05-17  7:20             ` Jens Axboe
2011-05-19  8:26               ` Alex,Shi
2011-05-19  8:47                 ` Alex,Shi [this message]
2011-05-19 18:27                 ` Jens Axboe
2011-05-20  0:22                   ` Alex,Shi
2011-05-20  0:40                     ` Shaohua Li
2011-05-20  5:17                       ` Alex,Shi

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=1305794851.22968.161.camel@debian \
    --to=alex.shi@intel.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    /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