public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@suse.de>
To: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
Cc: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v2 2/2] Initialize mempool and elevator only for request-based dm devices
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:35:11 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908111435.12020.knikanth@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A812680.7040804@ct.jp.nec.com>

On Tuesday 11 August 2009 13:36:24 Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> Hi Nikanth,
>
> On 08/10/2009 07:48 PM +0900, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> > Intialize the request_queue and elevator only when the device is marked
> > as a request-based device. This avoids unnecessary creation of mempool
> > for requests. Also we wrongly initialize the elevator even for bio-based
> > devices. As the /sys/block/dm-*/queue/scheduler is exported for
> > device-mapper devices, it is possible to confuse with scheduler options
> > for bio-based devices where scheduler is not at all used.
>
> Thank you for working on this.
> Actually, I had tried this delayed allocation thing before,
> but I chose the current implementation since I couldn't solve
> some problems, which your patch also has.
> Please see my comment below.
>

Thanks for the review & comments.

> > @@ -2203,6 +2199,25 @@ int dm_swap_table(struct mapped_device *md, struct
> > dm_table *table) goto out;
> >  	}
> >
> > +	/* new device is being marked as request-based */
> > +	if (!md->map && dm_table_request_based(table)) {
> > +		/* initialize queue for request-based dm */
> > +		r = blk_init_allocated_queue(md->queue, dm_request_fn, NULL);
> > +		if (r)
> > +			goto out;
>
> Generally, dm must not allocate memory during resume because
> it may cause a deadlock in no memory situation.
> However, there is no I/O on this device at this point,
> so the allocation should be ok for this special case.
> I think some comments are needed here to describe that.
>

Ok. This comment can be added.

> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * reinitialize make_request_fn as it was reset to the
> > +		 * default __make_request by blk_init_allocate_queue
> > +		 */
> > +		md->saved_make_request_fn = md->queue->make_request_fn;
> > +		blk_queue_make_request(md->queue, dm_request);
> > +
> > +		blk_queue_softirq_done(md->queue, dm_softirq_done);
> > +		blk_queue_prep_rq(md->queue, dm_prep_fn);
> > +		blk_queue_lld_busy(md->queue, dm_lld_busy);
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	__unbind(md);
> >  	r = __bind(md, table, &limits);
>
> The queue has been registered at the device creation time by
> add_disk() in alloc_dev().
> Since the queue is reconfigured (elevator is attached), you have to
> update the queue registration (e.g. unregister, then re-register).
> But it may not be easy.  At least, there is no exported interface to
> unregister/re-register queue.

Ah, yes. The scheduler attributes will not be exported in 
/sys/block/dm*/queue/iosched. Exporting elv_register_queue() and calling it 
here solves it. Something like..

@@ -2203,6 +2199,29 @@ int dm_swap_table(struct mapped_device *md, struct 
dm_table *table)
 		goto out;
 	}
 
+	/* new device is being marked as request-based */
+	if (!md->map && dm_table_request_based(table)) {
+		/* initialize queue for request-based dm */
+		r = blk_init_allocated_queue(md->queue, dm_request_fn, NULL);
+		if (r)
+			goto out;
+
+		r = elv_register_queue(md->queue);
+		/* if (r)
+		 *	 goto out; Better to ignore, just like add_disk does ;-)
+		 */
+		/*
+		 * reinitialize make_request_fn as it was reset to the
+		 * default __make_request by blk_init_allocate_queue
+		 */
+		md->saved_make_request_fn = md->queue->make_request_fn;
+		blk_queue_make_request(md->queue, dm_request);
+
+		blk_queue_softirq_done(md->queue, dm_softirq_done);
+		blk_queue_prep_rq(md->queue, dm_prep_fn);
+		blk_queue_lld_busy(md->queue, dm_lld_busy);
+	}
+
 	__unbind(md);
 	r = __bind(md, table, &limits);
 
I would post the v3 of the patches with this change. Do you see any problems 
in this?

This can also be solved by initializing the queue for new devices and then 
unregistering the elevator, if it is a bio-based device at table load time. 
Like...

diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
index 2d511f9..864dd29 100644
--- a/block/elevator.c
+++ b/block/elevator.c
@@ -939,9 +939,10 @@ static void __elv_unregister_queue(struct elevator_queue 
*e)
 
 void elv_unregister_queue(struct request_queue *q)
 {
-	if (q)
+	if (q && q->elevator)
 		__elv_unregister_queue(q->elevator);
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(elv_unregister_queue);
 
 void elv_register(struct elevator_type *e)
 {
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm.c b/drivers/md/dm.c
index 8a311ea..f6f77ea 100644
--- a/drivers/md/dm.c
+++ b/drivers/md/dm.c
@@ -2203,7 +2203,28 @@ int dm_swap_table(struct mapped_device *md, struct 
dm_table *table)
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	__unbind(md);
+	if (md->map)
+		__unbind(md);
+	else if (!dm_table_request_based(table)) {
+	/*
+	 * This is a new bio-based device, and doesnt use the elevator
+	 * and requests.
+	 */
+		struct request_queue *q;
+		q = md->queue;
+		if (q->elevator) {
+			struct request_list *rl = &q->rq;
+			elevator_exit(q->elevator);
+			elv_unregister_queue(q);
+			q->elevator = 0;
+			if (rl->rq_pool) {
+				mempool_destroy(rl->rq_pool);
+				rl->rq_pool = 0;
+			}
+		}
+
+	}
+
 	r = __bind(md, table, &limits);
 
 out:

But, I think, delaying the initialization, is the best solution.

Thanks
Nikanth

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-11 12:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-08  4:56 [PATCH 2/2] Initialize mempool and elevator only for request-based dm devices Nikanth Karthikesan
2009-08-08 16:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2009-08-10 10:21   ` Nikanth Karthikesan
2009-08-10 10:48     ` [PATCH-v2 " Nikanth Karthikesan
2009-08-11  8:06       ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2009-08-11  9:05         ` Nikanth Karthikesan [this message]
2009-08-11  9:32           ` [PATCH-v3 " Nikanth Karthikesan
2009-08-12  2:15           ` [PATCH-v2 " Kiyoshi Ueda
2009-08-12  8:47             ` Nikanth Karthikesan
2009-08-14  7:01               ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2010-05-11 16:23                 ` Mike Snitzer

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=200908111435.12020.knikanth@suse.de \
    --to=knikanth@suse.de \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=snitzer@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