public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Subject: [patch 7/9] blk: efficiency improvements
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:51:41 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <425BC45D.9030504@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <425BC262.1070500@yahoo.com.au>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 32 bytes --]

7/9

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

[-- Attachment #2: blk-efficient.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3583 bytes --]

In the case where the request is not able to be merged by the elevator,
don't retake the lock and retry the merge mechanism after allocating a
new request.

Instead assume that the chance of a merge remains slim, and now that
we've done most of the work allocating a request we may as well just
go with it.

Also be rid of the GFP_ATOMIC allocation: we've got working mempools
for the block layer now, so let's save atomic memory for things like
networking.

Lastly, in get_request_wait, do an initial get_request call before
going into the waitqueue. This is reported to help efficiency.

Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>

Index: linux-2.6/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c	2005-04-12 22:26:14.000000000 +1000
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c	2005-04-12 22:26:14.000000000 +1000
@@ -1952,10 +1952,11 @@ out:
  */
 static struct request *get_request_wait(request_queue_t *q, int rw)
 {
-	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
 	struct request *rq;
 
-	do {
+	rq = get_request(q, rw, GFP_NOIO);
+	while (!rq) {
+		DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
 		struct request_list *rl = &q->rq;
 
 		prepare_to_wait_exclusive(&rl->wait[rw], &wait,
@@ -1980,7 +1981,7 @@ static struct request *get_request_wait(
 			put_io_context(ioc);
 		}
 		finish_wait(&rl->wait[rw], &wait);
-	} while (!rq);
+	}
 
 	return rq;
 }
@@ -2557,7 +2558,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__blk_attempt_remerge);
 
 static int __make_request(request_queue_t *q, struct bio *bio)
 {
-	struct request *req, *freereq = NULL;
+	struct request *req;
 	int el_ret, rw, nr_sectors, cur_nr_sectors, barrier, err;
 	sector_t sector;
 
@@ -2582,14 +2583,9 @@ static int __make_request(request_queue_
 		goto end_io;
 	}
 
-again:
 	spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
 
-	if (elv_queue_empty(q)) {
-		blk_plug_device(q);
-		goto get_rq;
-	}
-	if (barrier)
+	if (unlikely(barrier) || elv_queue_empty(q))
 		goto get_rq;
 
 	el_ret = elv_merge(q, &req, bio);
@@ -2632,40 +2628,23 @@ again:
 				elv_merged_request(q, req);
 			goto out;
 
-		/*
-		 * elevator says don't/can't merge. get new request
-		 */
-		case ELEVATOR_NO_MERGE:
-			break;
-
+		/* ELV_NO_MERGE: elevator says don't/can't merge. */
 		default:
-			printk("elevator returned crap (%d)\n", el_ret);
-			BUG();
+			;
 	}
 
+get_rq:
 	/*
-	 * Grab a free request from the freelist - if that is empty, check
-	 * if we are doing read ahead and abort instead of blocking for
-	 * a free slot.
+	 * Grab a free request. This is might sleep but can not fail.
+	 */
+	spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	req = get_request_wait(q, rw);
+	/*
+	 * After dropping the lock and possibly sleeping here, our request
+	 * may now be mergeable after it had proven unmergeable (above).
+	 * We don't worry about that case for efficiency. It won't happen
+	 * often, and the elevators are able to handle it.
 	 */
-get_rq:
-	if (freereq) {
-		req = freereq;
-		freereq = NULL;
-	} else {
-		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
-		if ((freereq = get_request(q, rw, GFP_ATOMIC)) == NULL) {
-			/*
-			 * READA bit set
-			 */
-			err = -EWOULDBLOCK;
-			if (bio_rw_ahead(bio))
-				goto end_io;
-	
-			freereq = get_request_wait(q, rw);
-		}
-		goto again;
-	}
 
 	req->flags |= REQ_CMD;
 
@@ -2693,10 +2672,11 @@ get_rq:
 	req->rq_disk = bio->bi_bdev->bd_disk;
 	req->start_time = jiffies;
 
+	spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+	if (elv_queue_empty(q))
+		blk_plug_device(q);
 	add_request(q, req);
 out:
-	if (freereq)
-		__blk_put_request(q, freereq);
 	if (bio_sync(bio))
 		__generic_unplug_device(q);
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-04-12 13:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-04-12 12:43 [patch 0/9] various (mainly mempool fixes and block layer improvements) Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:48 ` [patch 1/9] GFP_ZERO fix Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:47   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:02     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-14 10:59     ` Manfred Spraul
2005-04-12 12:48 ` [patch 2/9] mempool gfp flag Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:50   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:03     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:49 ` [patch 3/9] no PF_MEMALLOC tinkering Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:57   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:13     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:49 ` [patch 4/9] blk: no memory barrier Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:50 ` [patch 5/9] blk: branch hints Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:50 ` [patch 6/9] blk: unplug later Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 19:58   ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-13  1:32     ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-13 10:20       ` Jens Axboe
2005-04-12 12:51 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2005-04-12 12:52 ` [patch 0/9] blk: reduce locking Nick Piggin
2005-04-12 12:53 ` [patch doh/9] mempool simplify alloc Nick Piggin

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=425BC45D.9030504@yahoo.com.au \
    --to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.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