From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754318AbbIRPme (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:42:34 -0400 Received: from victor.provo.novell.com ([137.65.250.26]:48786 "EHLO prv3-mh.provo.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751984AbbIRPmd (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:42:33 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] Add ida and idr helper routines. To: Tejun Heo , James Bottomley References: <915ec9ff5e9cc1fae0b36bf7d4c4cb115439e15d.1442263512.git.lduncan@suse.com> <20150915182755.GA31484@htj.duckdns.org> <1442342322.2177.13.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20150915184157.GA495@htj.duckdns.org> Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke , Johannes Thumshirn , Christoph Hellwig From: Lee Duncan X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Organization: SUSE Message-ID: <55FC30E2.8020000@suse.com> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 08:42:26 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150915184157.GA495@htj.duckdns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/15/2015 11:41 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:38:42AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: >> For most of the SCSI stuff, yes. I'm less sure about the sd numbers. >> They go up very high and get hammered a lot during system bring up and >> hot plug. I think having their own lock rather than wrapping everything >> around simple_ida_lock makes more sense here just because the system is >> heavily contended on getting indexes at bring up. >> >> To continue the thought, why not move simple_ida_lock into struct ida so >> we don't have to worry about the contention and can sue ida_simple_... >> everywhere? > > We sure can do that if necessary but I'm rather doubtful that even > with sd number hammering this is likely to be a problem. Let's > convert the users to the simple interface and make the lock per-ida if > we actually see contention on the lock. > > Thanks. > To be clear: you would like a patch series that converts the users of the ida_* routines in my patches to instead use the ida_simple_* routines, correct? And of course the ida_* helper routines I was adding in idr.h would not be needed. If this is correct, I will supply a version 2 patch series that addresses this issue as well as the two patch-naming issues that were raised. -- Lee Duncan