public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>, "v4.0" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O
Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 21:52:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150503015230.GG1949@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVMZWdxAPjL+QEjJDU-dyUcUmRbJicOXjGmw0S4ixpfnjA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 10:56:20PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Maybe just cap max_active to NR_OF_LOOP_DEVS * 16 or sth?  But idk,
> 
> It might not work because there are nested loop devices like fedora live CD, and
> in theory the max_active should have been set as loop's queue depth *
> nr_loop, otherwise there may be possibility of hanging.
> 
> So this patch is introduced.

If loop devices can be stacked, regardless of what you do with
nr_active, it may deadlock.  There needs to be a rescuer per each
nesting level (or just one per device).  This means that the current
code is broken.

> > how many concurrent workers are we talking about and why are we
> > capping per-queue concurrency from worker pool side instead of command
> > tag side?
> 
> I think there should be performance advantage to make queue depth a bit more
> because it can help to make queue pipeline as full. Also queue depth often
> means how many requests the hardware can queue, and it is a bit different
> with per-queue concurrency.

I'm not really following.  Can you please elaborate?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-03  1:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-01  3:28 [PATCH v6] block: loop: avoiding too many pending per work I/O Ming Lei
2015-05-01 10:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-01 13:36   ` Ming Lei
2015-05-01 14:22     ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-01 15:05       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-05-01 15:47         ` Tejun Heo
2015-05-02 15:09           ` Ming Lei
2015-05-02 14:56       ` Ming Lei
2015-05-03  1:52         ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-05-04 12:54           ` Ming Lei

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=20150503015230.GG1949@htj.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=jforbes@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=jmoyer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
    --cc=stable@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