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: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:17:28 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200908121417.28760.knikanth@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A8225DC.1060200@ct.jp.nec.com>

Hi Kiyoshi Ueda,

On Wednesday 12 August 2009 07:45:56 Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> Hi Nikanth,
>
> On 08/11/2009 06:05 PM +0900, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 August 2009 13:36:24 Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
> >> On 08/10/2009 07:48 PM +0900, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:
> >>> +
> >>> +		/*
> >>> +		 * 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?
>
> Humm, it might work for now, but I disagree with that.
>
> Since elevator is block internal and dm doesn't really care
> (its initialization is actually hidden in blk_init_allocated_queue()),
> directly calling elv_register_queue() from dm seems not right.
> It will likely introduce a bug by future changes in block layer.
>
> I think the right approach is to define a proper block layer interface
> to reflect the queue configuration change.
> That's why I said "Updating the queue registration may not be easy".
>

I do not see too much of overhead in the future with this approach, atleast no 
more than "proper block layer interface". IMHO, unregistering the queue and 
registering the queue again with the elevator, is basically wasting CPU cycles 
and possibly would confuse the user-space, which may be watching the sysfs... 
Or asking block layer to recheck and find what we have changed in the 
request_queue. It does not sound like the best solution.

It is better to tell the block-layer that we have added a q->request_fn 
function, so initialize the elevator.

If block layer, exports elv_register_queue() and document it, it would become 
a proper block layer interface, right? Device-mapper would always depend on 
internals of block-layer to some extent. ;-)

Thanks
Nikanth

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-12  8:45 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
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 [this message]
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=200908121417.28760.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