public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: John Meneghini <jmeneghi@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	kbusch@kernel.org, sagi@grimberg.me,
	linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	emilne@redhat.com, jrani@purestorage.com, randyj@purestorage.com,
	chaitanyak@nvidia.com, hare@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/1] nvme-multipath: implement "queue-depth" iopolicy
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 10:46:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240624084627.GA20032@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d4ae4b0a-b3a4-40db-87e3-c9a493408172@redhat.com>

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 01:54:29PM -0400, John Meneghini wrote:
>>> +static void nvme_subsys_iopolicy_update(struct nvme_subsystem *subsys,
>>> +		int iopolicy)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl;
>>> +	int old_iopolicy = READ_ONCE(subsys->iopolicy);
>>> +
>>> +	if (old_iopolicy == iopolicy)
>>> +		return;
>>> +
>>> +	WRITE_ONCE(subsys->iopolicy, iopolicy);
>>
>> What is the atomicy model here?  There doesn't seem to be any
>> global lock protecting it?  Maybe move it into the
>> nvme_subsystems_lock critical section?
>
> Good question.  I didn't write this code. Yes, I agree this looks racy. 
> Updates to the subsys->iopolicy variable are not atomic. They don't need to 
> be. The process of changing the iopolicy doesn't need to be synchronized 
> and each CPU's cache will be updated lazily. This was done to avoid the 
> expense of adding (another) atomic read the io path.

Looks like all sysfs ->store calls for the same attribute are protected
by of->mutex in kernfs_fop_write_iter and we should actually be fine
here.  Sorry for the noise.

>> 	pr_notice("%s: changing iopolicy from %s to %s\n",
>> 		subsys->subnqn,
>> 		nvme_iopolicy_names[old_iopolicy],
>> 		nvme_iopolicy_names[iopolicy]);
>
> How about:
>
> pr_notice("Changed iopolicy from %s to %s for subsysnqn %s\n",
>                 nvme_iopolicy_names[old_iopolicy],
>                 nvme_iopolicy_names[iopolicy],
>                 subsys->subnqn);

Having the identification as the prefixe seems easier to parse
and grep for. 


  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-24  8:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-19 16:35 [PATCH v7 0/1] nvme: queue-depth multipath iopolicy John Meneghini
2024-06-19 16:35 ` [PATCH v7 1/1] nvme-multipath: implement "queue-depth" iopolicy John Meneghini
2024-06-20  6:56   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-06-20 14:41     ` John Meneghini
2024-06-20 17:54     ` John Meneghini
2024-06-24  8:46       ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2024-06-24 17:50         ` John Meneghini
2024-06-24 17:54           ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20240624084627.GA20032@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=chaitanyak@nvidia.com \
    --cc=emilne@redhat.com \
    --cc=hare@kernel.org \
    --cc=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
    --cc=jrani@purestorage.com \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=randyj@purestorage.com \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    /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