From: Mats Petersson <mats.petersson@citrix.com>
To: xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] docs: expand persistent grants protocol
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:58:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50BE1D97.1000509@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1354636260.15296.43.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
On 04/12/12 15:51, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 15:15 +0000, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> Acked + applied, thanks.
>
>> ---
>> xen/include/public/io/blkif.h | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h b/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h
>> index 8df5866..1f0fbd6 100644
>> --- a/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/public/io/blkif.h
>> @@ -137,7 +137,22 @@
>> * can map persistently depends on the implementation, but ideally it
>> * should be RING_SIZE * BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST. Using this
>> * feature the backend doesn't need to unmap each grant, preventing
>> - * costly TLB flushes.
>> + * costly TLB flushes. The backend driver should only map grants
>> + * persistently if the frontend supports it. If a backend driver chooses
>> + * to use the persistent protocol when the frontend doesn't support it,
>> + * it will probably hit the maximum number of persistently mapped grants
>> + * (due to the fact that the frontend won't be reusing the same grants),
>> + * and fall back to non-persistent mode. Backend implementations may
>> + * shrink or expand the number of persistently mapped grants without
>> + * notifying the frontend depending on memory constraints (this might
>> + * cause a performance degradation).
>> + *
>> + * If a backend driver wants to limit the maximum number of persistently
>> + * mapped grants to a value less than RING_SIZE *
>> + * BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST a LRU strategy should be used to
>> + * discard the grants that are less commonly used. Using a LRU in the
>> + * backend driver paired with a LIFO queue in the frontend will
>> + * allow us to have better performance in this scenario.
>> *
>> *----------------------- Request Transport Parameters ------------------------
>> *
>> @@ -258,11 +273,23 @@
>> * feature-persistent
>> * Values: 0/1 (boolean)
>> * Default Value: 0
>> - * Notes: 7, 8
>> + * Notes: 7, 8, 9
>> *
>> * A value of "1" indicates that the frontend will reuse the same grants
>> * for all transactions, allowing the backend to map them with write
>> - * access (even when it should be read-only).
>> + * access (even when it should be read-only). If the frontend hits the
>> + * maximum number of allowed persistently mapped grants, it can fallback
>> + * to non persistent mode. This will cause a performance degradation,
>> + * since the the backend driver will still try to map those grants
>> + * persistently. Since the persistent grants protocol is compatible with
>> + * the previous protocol, a frontend driver can choose to work in
>> + * persistent mode even when the backend doesn't support it.
>> + *
>> + * It is recommended that the frontend driver stores the persistently
>> + * mapped grants in a LIFO queue, so a subset of all persistently mapped
>> + * grants gets used commonly. This is done in case the backend driver
>> + * decides to limit the maximum number of persistently mapped grants
>> + * to a value less than RING_SIZE * BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST.
>> *
>> *------------------------- Virtual Device Properties -------------------------
>> *
>> @@ -308,6 +335,10 @@
>> * (8) The frontend driver has to allow the backend driver to map all grants
>> * with write access, even when they should be mapped read-only, since
>> * further requests may reuse these grants and require write permissions.
>> + * (9) Linux implementation doesn't have a limit on the maximum number of
>> + * grants that can be persistently mapped in the frontend driver, but
>> + * due to the frontent driver implementation it should never be bigger
frontent -> frontend?
--
Mats
>> + * than RING_SIZE * BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST.
>> */
>>
>> /*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-04 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-29 15:15 [PATCH v2] docs: expand persistent grants protocol Roger Pau Monne
2012-12-04 15:51 ` Ian Campbell
2012-12-04 15:58 ` Mats Petersson [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=50BE1D97.1000509@citrix.com \
--to=mats.petersson@citrix.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).