linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Justin TerAvest <teravest@google.com>,
	Chad Talbott <ctalbott@google.com>,
	Nauman Rafique <nauman@google.com>,
	Divyesh Shah <dpshah@google.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: default group_isolation to 1, remove option
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:45:20 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D6F0ED0.80804@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110301142002.GB25699@redhat.com>

On 2011-03-01 09:20, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> I think creating per group request pool will complicate the
> implementation further. (we have done that once in the past). Jens
> once mentioned that he liked number of requests per iocontext limit
> better than overall queue limit. So if we implement per iocontext
> limit, it will get rid of need of doing anything extra for group
> infrastructure.
> 
> Jens, do you think per iocontext per queue limit on request
> descriptors make sense and we can get rid of per queue overall limit? 

Since we practically don't need a limit anymore to begin with (or so is
the theory), then yes we can move to per-ioc limits instead and get rid
of that queue state. We'd have to hold on to the ioc for the duration of
the IO explicitly from the request then.

I primarily like that implementation since it means we can make the IO
completion lockless, at least on the block layer side. We still have
state to complete in the schedulers that require that, but it's a good
step at least.

-- 
Jens Axboe


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-03-03  3:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-01  0:19 RFC: default group_isolation to 1, remove option Justin TerAvest
2011-03-01 14:20 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-01 18:44   ` Justin TerAvest
2011-03-02 21:28     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-06 16:06       ` Andrea Righi
2011-03-03  3:45   ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-03-03 15:30     ` Per iocontext request descriptor limits (Was: Re: RFC: default group_isolation to 1, remove option) Vivek Goyal
2011-03-03 15:44       ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-03 16:57         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-03 18:03           ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-04 11:01             ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-04 21:31               ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-04 21:34                 ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 18:20     ` RFC: default group_isolation to 1, remove option Justin TerAvest
2011-03-07 19:39       ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 20:24         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:32           ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 20:46             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:47               ` Jens Axboe
2011-03-07 23:41                 ` Justin TerAvest
2011-03-08  0:05             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:34           ` Vivek Goyal
2011-03-07 20:36             ` 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=4D6F0ED0.80804@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=ctalbott@google.com \
    --cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=dpshah@google.com \
    --cc=guijianfeng@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nauman@google.com \
    --cc=teravest@google.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).