From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: use bigger array for batch gnt operations
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:34:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <521B6761.4000609@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51FA6E4E.2080001@citrix.com>
On 01/08/13 16:18, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On 01/08/13 14:30, David Vrabel wrote:
>> On 01/08/13 13:08, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>>> Right now the maximum number of grant operations that can be batched
>>> in a single request is BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST (11). This was
>>> OK before indirect descriptors because the maximum number of segments
>>> in a request was 11, but with the introduction of indirect
>>> descriptors the maximum number of segments in a request has been
>>> increased past 11.
>>>
>>> The memory used by the structures that are passed in the hypercall was
>>> allocated from the stack, but if we have to increase the size of the
>>> array we can no longer use stack memory, so we have to pre-allocate
>>> it.
>>>
>>> This patch increases the maximum size of batch grant operations and
>>> replaces the use of stack memory with pre-allocated memory, that is
>>> reserved when the blkback instance is initialized.
>> [...]
>>> --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c
>> [...]
>>> @@ -148,6 +155,16 @@ static struct xen_blkif *xen_blkif_alloc(domid_t domid)
>>> if (!req->indirect_pages[j])
>>> goto fail;
>>> }
>>> + req->map = kcalloc(GNT_OPERATIONS_SIZE, sizeof(req->map[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!req->map)
>>> + goto fail;
>>> + req->unmap = kcalloc(GNT_OPERATIONS_SIZE, sizeof(req->unmap[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!req->unmap)
>>> + goto fail;
>>> + req->pages_to_gnt = kcalloc(GNT_OPERATIONS_SIZE, sizeof(req->pages_to_gnt[0]),
>>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!req->pages_to_gnt)
>>> + goto fail;
>>
>> Do these need to be per-request? Or can they all share a common set of
>> arrays?
>
> No, we cannot share them unless we serialize the unmap of grants using a
> spinlock (like we do when writing the reponse on the ring).
Any other comments on this one? Should I resubmit it?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-26 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-01 12:08 [PATCH] xen-blkback: use bigger array for batch gnt operations Roger Pau Monne
2013-08-01 12:30 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2013-08-01 14:18 ` Roger Pau Monné
2013-08-26 14:34 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
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=521B6761.4000609@citrix.com \
--to=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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