public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Cc: Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>,
	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	aaronc@gelato.unsw.edu.au
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] cfq-iosched: remove redundant queuing detection code
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:48:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091110154809.GL8742@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <x49k4xy5qw6.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>

On Tue, Nov 10 2009, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 10 2009, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, Nov 10 2009, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> >> >> The core block layer already has code to detect presence of command
> >> >> queuing devices. We convert cfq to use that instead of re-doing the
> >> >> computation.
> >> >
> >> > There's is the major difference that the CFQ variant is dynamic and the
> >> > block layer one is not. This change came from Aaron some time ago IIRC,
> >> > see commit 45333d5. It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem.
> >> 
> >> Really?  blk_dequeue_request sure looks like it updates things
> >> dynamically, but only one way (not queueing -> queueing).  Would it make
> >
> > Yes of course the block layer one is dynamically on as well. The ideal
> > goal would be to have every driver use the block layer tagging in which
> > case we'd know without checking, but alas it isn't so (yet). My point is
> > that the CFQ variant is dynamically off as well. Corrado presents his
> > patch as a direct functional equivelant, which it definitely isn't.
> 
> OK.  So we really want to keep track of two things:
> 1) What queue depth does the hardware support?
> 2) What is the command queue depth configured to?
> 
> That second thing can be changed by the administrator (down from or up
> to the maximum value allowed by 1).
> 
> >> sense to just put CFQ's logic into the block layer so that everyone uses
> >> the same implementation?  It makes little sense to have two notions of
> >> whether or not queueing is supported for a device.
> >
> > The one use in the block layer cares about the static property of the
> > device, not the current behaviour. So I'm not sure it makes a lot of
> > sense to unify these. It's not really a case of code duplication either,
> > the block layer one is two checks and a bit. The cfq variant is a bit
> > more involved in that it tracks the state continually.
> 
> Why don't we simply use the value configured via the queue_depth sysfs
> file?

First of all, that only covers SCSI. We could do that by having the tag
on/off functions set the same flag. But even for such devices, actual
tag depth is dependent upon what other devices are on the controller
(since it's often a shared map) and may not even be statically
detectable in the sense that actual depth is only really seen when the
device returns busy on a queue attempt.

In most cases it would work fine, but the dynamic detection is more
reliable. The sysfs setting in reality is max setting.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-10 15:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-10 13:54 [RFC, PATCH] cfq-iosched: remove redundant queuing detection code Corrado Zoccolo
2009-11-10 15:03 ` Jeff Moyer
2009-11-10 15:14 ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-10 15:20   ` Jeff Moyer
2009-11-10 15:27     ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-10 15:41       ` Jeff Moyer
2009-11-10 15:48         ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-11-10 15:55           ` Jeff Moyer
2009-11-10 17:56   ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-11-12 12:16     ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-12 13:14       ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-11-12 13:16         ` 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=20091110154809.GL8742@kernel.dk \
    --to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=aaronc@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.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