public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
Cc: agk@redhat.com, mchristi@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
	j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] rqbased-dm: allow blk_get_request() to be  called from interrupt context
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 19:49:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061220184917.GJ10535@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061220.125002.71083198.k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>

On Wed, Dec 20 2006, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
> Thank you for the comment.
> 
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 14:48:49 +0100, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
> > >  static struct request *get_request(request_queue_t *q, int rw, struct bio *bio,
> > > -				   gfp_t gfp_mask)
> > > +				   gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned long *flags)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct request *rq = NULL;
> > >  	struct request_list *rl = &q->rq;
> > > @@ -2119,7 +2120,10 @@ static struct request *get_request(reque
> > >  	if (priv)
> > >  		rl->elvpriv++;
> > >  
> > > -	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> > > +	if (flags)
> > > +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, *flags);
> > > +	else
> > > +		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> > 
> > Big NACK on this - it's not only really ugly, it's also buggy to pass
> > interrupt flags as function arguments. As you also mention in the 0/1
> > mail, this also breaks CFQ.
> > 
> > Why do you need in-interrupt request allocation?
>  
> Because I'd like to use blk_get_request() in q->request_fn()
> which can be called from interrupt context like below:
>   scsi_io_completion -> scsi_end_request -> scsi_next_command
>   -> scsi_run_queue -> blk_run_queue -> q->request_fn
> 
> Generally, device-mapper (dm) clones an original I/O and dispatches
> the clones to underlying destination devices.
> In the request-based dm patch, the clone creation and the dispatch
> are done in q->request_fn().  To create the clone, blk_get_request()
> is used to get a request from underlying destination device's queue.
> By doing that in q->request_fn(), dm can deal with struct request
> after bios are merged by __make_request().
> 
> Do you think creating another function like blk_get_request_nowait()
> is acceptable?
> Or request should not be allocated in q->request_fn() anyway?

You should not be allocating requests from that path, for a number of
reasons. The design isn't very nice either.

The easy way out would be to punt to a workqueue to handle the requests.

An alternative way would be to set aside some requests that you can get
at without allocation (maintain a little freelist of manually allocated
requests), and retrieve a free one from there when inside request_fn. If
you run out, just bail out of request_fn and make sure to reinvoke it
when some of your previously issued requests complete and are added back
to that freelist.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2006-12-20 18:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-12-19 22:11 [RFC PATCH 1/8] rqbased-dm: allow blk_get_request() to be called from interrupt context Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-20 13:48 ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-20 17:50   ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-20 18:49     ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2006-12-20 21:55       ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-21  7:53         ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-21 17:59           ` [dm-devel] " Mike Christie
2006-12-21 18:13             ` Mike Christie
2006-12-21 18:24               ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-21 18:30                 ` Mike Christie
2006-12-21 18:36                   ` Mike Christie
2006-12-21 18:42                     ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-21 18:57                       ` Mike Christie
2006-12-21 19:19                         ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-21 22:22                           ` Mike Christie
2006-12-21 18:40                   ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-21 18:11           ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2006-12-21 18:21             ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-20 19:11     ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-20 19:17       ` Jens Axboe
2006-12-22 14:01     ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-12-22 17:32       ` 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=20061220184917.GJ10535@kernel.dk \
    --to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchristi@redhat.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