From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] block-queue: Delay and batch metadata writes
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:33:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C977EC1.9010605@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C977626.4040806@codemonkey.ws>
Am 20.09.2010 16:56, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>>> +void blkqueue_flush(BlockQueue *bq)
>>> +{
>>> + qemu_mutex_lock(&bq->flush_lock);
>>> +
>>> + /* Process any left over requests */
>>> + while (QTAILQ_FIRST(&bq->queue)) {
>>> + blkqueue_process_request(bq);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + qemu_mutex_unlock(&bq->flush_lock);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void *blkqueue_thread(void *_bq)
>>> +{
>>> + BlockQueue *bq = _bq;
>>> +#ifndef RUN_TESTS
>>> + BlockQueueRequest *req;
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>> + qemu_mutex_lock(&bq->flush_lock);
>>> + while (!bq->thread_done) {
>>> + barrier();
>
> A barrier shouldn't be needed here.
It was needed when I started with an empty thread because gcc would
"optimize" while(!bq->thread_done) into an endless loop. I guess there
is enough code added now that gcc won't try to be clever any more, so I
can remove that.
>>> +#ifndef RUN_TESTS
>>> + req = QTAILQ_FIRST(&bq->queue);
>>> +
>>> + /* Don't process barriers, we only do that on flushes */
>>> + if (req&& (req->type != REQ_TYPE_BARRIER ||
>>> bq->queue_size> 42)) {
>>> + blkqueue_process_request(bq);
>>> + } else {
>>> + qemu_cond_wait(&bq->cond,&bq->flush_lock);
>>> + }
>
>
> The normal pattern for this is:
>
> while (!condition) {
> qemu_cond_wait(&cond, &lock);
> }
> process_request()
>
> It's generally best not to deviate from this pattern in terms of code
> readability.
Hm, yes, I think you're right. The code used to be a bit more involved
here initially and it seems that I missed the last obvious piece of
simplification.
> A less invasive way of doing this (assuming we're okay with it from a
> correctness perspective) is to make use of qemu_aio_wait() as a
> replacement for qemu_mutex_lock() and shift the pread/pwrite calls to
> bdrv_aio_write/bdrv_aio_read.
>
> IOW, blkqueue_pwrite stages a request via bdrv_aio_write().
> blkqueue_pread() either returns a cached read or it does a
> bdrv_pread(). The blkqueue_flush() call will then do qemu_aio_wait() to
> wait for all pending I/Os to complete.
I was actually considering that, but it would have been a bit more
coding to keep track of another queue of in-flight requests, juggling
with some more AIOCBs and implementing an emulation for the missing
bdrv_aio_pwrite. Nothing really dramatic, it just was easier to start
this way.
If we come to the conclusion that bdrv_aio_write is the way to go and
it's worth the work, I'm fine with changing it.
Kevin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-20 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-20 13:56 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] block-queue: Delay and batch metadata writes Kevin Wolf
2010-09-20 14:31 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 14:56 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 15:33 ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2010-09-20 15:48 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 15:08 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-09-20 15:33 ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-20 15:38 ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-20 15:46 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-09-20 15:40 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 15:55 ` Kevin Wolf
2010-09-20 16:34 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 15:51 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-09-20 16:05 ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-21 9:13 ` Kevin Wolf
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=4C977EC1.9010605@redhat.com \
--to=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).