* [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged
@ 2011-05-20 5:28 Namhyung Kim
2011-05-20 8:31 ` Shaohua Li
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Namhyung Kim @ 2011-05-20 5:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah
Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging")
removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them.
Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>
Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com>
---
block/blk-core.c | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req,
req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio));
drive_stat_acct(req, 0);
+ elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio);
return true;
}
@@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q,
req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio));
drive_stat_acct(req, 0);
+ elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio);
return true;
}
--
1.7.5
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 5:28 [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged Namhyung Kim @ 2011-05-20 8:31 ` Shaohua Li 2011-05-20 9:51 ` Namhyung Kim 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Shaohua Li @ 2011-05-20 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Namhyung Kim; +Cc: Jens Axboe, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: > Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") > removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> > Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> > --- > block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 > --- a/block/blk-core.c > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, > req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > > drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > return true; > } > > @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, > req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > > drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > return true; > } Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. Thanks, Shaohua ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 8:31 ` Shaohua Li @ 2011-05-20 9:51 ` Namhyung Kim 2011-05-20 18:50 ` Jens Axboe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Namhyung Kim @ 2011-05-20 9:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shaohua Li; +Cc: Jens Axboe, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah Hello, 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: > 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: > > Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") > > removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> > > Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> > > --- > > block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > > index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 > > --- a/block/blk-core.c > > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > > @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, > > req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > > > > drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > > + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > > return true; > > } > > > > @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, > > req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > > > > drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > > + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > > return true; > > } > Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called > in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. > Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? Thanks. -- Regards, Namhyung Kim ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 9:51 ` Namhyung Kim @ 2011-05-20 18:50 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-20 19:19 ` Vivek Goyal 2011-05-23 2:10 ` Shaohua Li 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2011-05-20 18:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Namhyung Kim; +Cc: Shaohua Li, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah On 2011-05-20 11:51, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: >> 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: >>> Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") >>> removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> >>> Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> >>> --- >>> block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c >>> index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 >>> --- a/block/blk-core.c >>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c >>> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); >>> >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); >>> return true; >>> } >>> >>> @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); >>> >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); >>> return true; >>> } >> Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called >> in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. >> > > Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect > the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the > elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? Your patch should be safe, it's essentially only for the cgroup stuff that does its own accounting and has appropriate protection for it. We'd want to do this for both the plug and not-plugged merge case. It's a bit of a shame to add this though, since now we are hitting the cgroup lock for each merge. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 18:50 ` Jens Axboe @ 2011-05-20 19:19 ` Vivek Goyal 2011-05-20 19:21 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-23 2:10 ` Shaohua Li 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Vivek Goyal @ 2011-05-20 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Namhyung Kim, Shaohua Li, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 08:50:47PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 2011-05-20 11:51, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > Hello, > > > > 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: > >> 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: > >>> Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") > >>> removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> > >>> Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> > >>> --- > >>> block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ > >>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > >>> index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 > >>> --- a/block/blk-core.c > >>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c > >>> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, > >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>> > >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>> return true; > >>> } > >>> > >>> @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, > >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>> > >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>> return true; > >>> } > >> Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called > >> in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. > >> > > > > Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect > > the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the > > elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? > > Your patch should be safe, it's essentially only for the cgroup stuff > that does its own accounting and has appropriate protection for it. We'd > want to do this for both the plug and not-plugged merge case. > > It's a bit of a shame to add this though, since now we are hitting the > cgroup lock for each merge. I think wer can make MERGED per cpu as I have done in my other patch series for following dispatch stats. BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SECTORS, /* Total bytes transferred */ BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICE_BYTES, /* Total IOs serviced, post merge */ BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICED, Jens are you planning to merge lockless throttling series? Once that gets merged, we can convert this MERGED stat also per cpu and get rid of need of taking blkg->stats_lock. Thanks Vivek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 19:19 ` Vivek Goyal @ 2011-05-20 19:21 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-20 21:02 ` Vivek Goyal 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Jens Axboe @ 2011-05-20 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vivek Goyal; +Cc: Namhyung Kim, Shaohua Li, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah On 2011-05-20 21:19, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 08:50:47PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 2011-05-20 11:51, Namhyung Kim wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: >>>> 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: >>>>> Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") >>>>> removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> >>>>> Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ >>>>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c >>>>> index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 >>>>> --- a/block/blk-core.c >>>>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c >>>>> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, >>>>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); >>>>> >>>>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); >>>>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); >>>>> return true; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, >>>>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); >>>>> >>>>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); >>>>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); >>>>> return true; >>>>> } >>>> Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called >>>> in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. >>>> >>> >>> Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect >>> the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the >>> elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? >> >> Your patch should be safe, it's essentially only for the cgroup stuff >> that does its own accounting and has appropriate protection for it. We'd >> want to do this for both the plug and not-plugged merge case. >> >> It's a bit of a shame to add this though, since now we are hitting the >> cgroup lock for each merge. > > I think wer can make MERGED per cpu as I have done in my other patch > series for following dispatch stats. > > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SECTORS, > /* Total bytes transferred */ > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICE_BYTES, > /* Total IOs serviced, post merge */ > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICED, Yep, lets please do that and we can re-instate the merge calls with that, too. > Jens are you planning to merge lockless throttling series? Once that gets > merged, we can convert this MERGED stat also per cpu and get rid of need of > taking blkg->stats_lock. Merged them about an hour ago :-) Send further updates relative to for-2.6.40/core. -- Jens Axboe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 19:21 ` Jens Axboe @ 2011-05-20 21:02 ` Vivek Goyal 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Vivek Goyal @ 2011-05-20 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Namhyung Kim, Shaohua Li, linux-kernel, Divyesh Shah On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 09:21:03PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 2011-05-20 21:19, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 08:50:47PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> On 2011-05-20 11:51, Namhyung Kim wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: > >>>> 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: > >>>>> Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") > >>>>> removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> > >>>>> Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ > >>>>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > >>>>> index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 > >>>>> --- a/block/blk-core.c > >>>>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c > >>>>> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, > >>>>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>>>> > >>>>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>>>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>>>> return true; > >>>>> } > >>>>> > >>>>> @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, > >>>>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>>>> > >>>>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>>>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>>>> return true; > >>>>> } > >>>> Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called > >>>> in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect > >>> the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the > >>> elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? > >> > >> Your patch should be safe, it's essentially only for the cgroup stuff > >> that does its own accounting and has appropriate protection for it. We'd > >> want to do this for both the plug and not-plugged merge case. > >> > >> It's a bit of a shame to add this though, since now we are hitting the > >> cgroup lock for each merge. > > > > I think wer can make MERGED per cpu as I have done in my other patch > > series for following dispatch stats. > > > > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SECTORS, > > /* Total bytes transferred */ > > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICE_BYTES, > > /* Total IOs serviced, post merge */ > > BLKIO_STAT_CPU_SERVICED, > > Yep, lets please do that and we can re-instate the merge calls with > that, too. > > > Jens are you planning to merge lockless throttling series? Once that gets > > merged, we can convert this MERGED stat also per cpu and get rid of need of > > taking blkg->stats_lock. > > Merged them about an hour ago :-) > > Send further updates relative to for-2.6.40/core. Sure. I am working on a patch now. Thanks Vivek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged 2011-05-20 18:50 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-20 19:19 ` Vivek Goyal @ 2011-05-23 2:10 ` Shaohua Li 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Shaohua Li @ 2011-05-23 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jens Axboe; +Cc: Namhyung Kim, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Divyesh Shah On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 02:50 +0800, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 2011-05-20 11:51, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > Hello, > > > > 2011-05-20 (금), 16:31 +0800, Shaohua Li: > >> 2011/5/20 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>: > >>> Commit 73c101011926 ("block: initial patch for on-stack per-task plugging") > >>> removed calls to elv_bio_merged() when @bio merged with @req. Re-add them. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com> > >>> Cc: Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com> > >>> --- > >>> block/blk-core.c | 2 ++ > >>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > >>> index 3fe00a14822a..4dc02ef5fc82 100644 > >>> --- a/block/blk-core.c > >>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c > >>> @@ -1132,6 +1132,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_back_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct request *req, > >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>> > >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>> return true; > >>> } > >>> > >>> @@ -1173,6 +1174,7 @@ static bool bio_attempt_front_merge(struct request_queue *q, > >>> req->ioprio = ioprio_best(req->ioprio, bio_prio(bio)); > >>> > >>> drive_stat_acct(req, 0); > >>> + elv_bio_merged(q, req, bio); > >>> return true; > >>> } > >> Looks you should do this in __make_request. when the routine is called > >> in attempt_plug_merge, the request isn't added to elevator yet. > >> > > > > Hmm.. anyway it is merged. Is there any reason why we shouldn't collect > > the stat - or invoke the callback routine - if the @req is not in the > > elevator? Or we need to add a separate stat item for this case? > > Your patch should be safe, it's essentially only for the cgroup stuff > that does its own accounting and has appropriate protection for it. I'm just worrying about there is duplicate accounting, but anyway it's safe. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-23 2:10 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-05-20 5:28 [PATCH] block: call elv_bio_merged() when merged Namhyung Kim 2011-05-20 8:31 ` Shaohua Li 2011-05-20 9:51 ` Namhyung Kim 2011-05-20 18:50 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-20 19:19 ` Vivek Goyal 2011-05-20 19:21 ` Jens Axboe 2011-05-20 21:02 ` Vivek Goyal 2011-05-23 2:10 ` Shaohua Li
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox