From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Ed Cashin <ecashin@coraid.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] aoe: add barrier support
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:38:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091010103801.GP9228@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4172194fb69fa7475c78e20ddce579fa@coraid.com>
On Fri, Oct 09 2009, Ed Cashin wrote:
> This patch allows the aoe driver to support barrier bios by draining
> the current set of outstanding AoE commands and then issuing an ATA
> flush command. If the barrier contains I/O, that I/O is then
> performed, followed by a final ATA flush command.
Good, that's exactly how libata/ide works as well.
> This aoe driver differs from most block device drivers in that it does
> not handle I/O requests but handles bios, providing a make_request_fn
> to the block layer.
>
> The implementation makes the make_request_fn sleep to wait for any
> in-progress barrier to finish, and it sleeps waiting for the ATA flush
> to complete. I expect the process using make_request_fn to be
> something like "cp", in which case sleeping will not interfere with
> the performance characteristics of any unrelated aoe devices in the
> system. That hasn't been tested yet, though, and I'm concerned that
> putting pdflush to sleep could interfere with dirty data flushing on
> other aoe devices. Any comments about this issue would be
> appreciated.
pdflush doesn't exist anymore, the per-bdi thread may block without
causing any problems.
> Some debugging code remains in this patch for testing purposes, marked
> with "XXXdebug". This code allows barrier handling to be turned off
> and on and to be traced. Turning barrier support on and off is only
> supported on module load. This testing feature will not be a part of
> the final barrier support for aoe.
Sounds good.
> Jens Axboe suggests that code that we know can sleep should use
> spin_lock_irq instead of spin_lock_irqsave. Even though the latter is
> harmless, it also adds no value. This patch sneaks a few such lock
> changes in. Please comment if you think the change from
> spin_lock_irqsave to spin_lock_irq should be split out of the final
> version of this patch.
While I (obviously) think that is a good idea, you should not include it
in this patch. Patches should generally only do just one thing.
--
Jens Axboe
next parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-10 10:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4172194fb69fa7475c78e20ddce579fa@coraid.com>
2009-10-10 10:38 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-10-09 14:30 [RFC] aoe: add barrier support Ed Cashin
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=20091010103801.GP9228@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=ecashin@coraid.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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