From: Andy Grover <agrover@redhat.com>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/8] target: Save memory on unused se_dev_entrys and se_luns
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 15:54:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <541B629B.6090406@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1411025936.13381.183.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com>
On 09/18/2014 12:38 AM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-09-13 at 21:55 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> ping again. We're getting closer to the end of the 3.18 merge window
>> and there still hasn't been a response. Should Andy just send the patches
>> directly to Linus once 3.18 opens given that they have been out on the list
>> since Jun 23? (with a positive review from me and no negative one)
> Removing unused per WWPN endpoint LUN + per NodeACL MappedLUN memory is
> a nice optimization to have, but I'm not yet convinced that extending
> existing control path spinlocks to support an array of pointers is
> ultimately worth the complexity it adds here.
9 files changed, 250 insertions(+), 367 deletions(-).
This patchset removes 100+ lines of code. Furthermore, I wouldn't
characterize it as extending locks, so much as putting locks where they
should've always been. The fact that device_list[foo] is never null
means we've avoided crashes but not potentially incorrect accesses.
> Another concern is how these changes effect active session + device I/O
> shutdown, which is an area of regressions I'd rather avoid
I assume this set would spend time in your tree, followed by Linus' tree
before making it into a release. Also, any logic errors are likely to
result in a fault, so they should not remain hidden for long.
> if the
> primary benefit of this series is only reducing memory footprint for
> unused LUNs + MappedLUNs.
Yes it does reduce wasted memory, that should be reason enough I'd say.
But this patchset is also a building block for further improvements that
are more significant. This set transitions all lun and mappedlun checks
from checking a flag to checking for NULL. This is necessary before we
can improve from a fixed-size array to more size-scalable data
structures like a radix tree, or lockless, with RCU.
> Lowering the TRANSPORT_MAX_LUNS_PER_TPG value
> at compile time today is the simple way for reducing overall memory
> footprint for folks who need to scale up the number of targets using
> smaller individual LUN mappings.
This is only an option for embedded. We should scale the amount of
memory we use with the number of allocated LUNs and mapped LUNs.
> As for something smarter, given the mostly read-only nature of LUN +
> MappedLUN pointers to individual TPGT + NodeACLs context, I'd rather see
> something based on RCU arrays + percpu_ref counting to avoid this type
> of complexity to existing code, and move in the direction of dropping
> fast-path I_T ->device_list_lock access all together.
See above about pointers vs flags, this is a first step toward more
performant *and* space-efficient data structures.
> Beyond these objections, there are some useful fixes + cleanups from
> this series that I'm OK with merging soon..
I've pushed this patchset to
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/grover/linux.git
on two branches against your and Linus' repos:
against-linus
against-target-pending-for-next
(looked-over and compile-tested)
For your convenience.
Regards -- Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-18 22:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1404171587-28845-1-git-send-email-agrover@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20140729131511.GA30232@lst.de>
2014-09-13 19:55 ` [PATCHv3 0/8] target: Save memory on unused se_dev_entrys and se_luns Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-18 7:38 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2014-09-18 22:54 ` Andy Grover [this message]
2014-09-18 23:17 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2014-09-23 17:02 ` Andy Grover
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=541B629B.6090406@redhat.com \
--to=agrover@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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