[PATCH v5 1/2] blk-mq: add tagset quiesce interface

Ming Lei ming.lei at redhat.com
Fri Aug 7 05:24:57 EDT 2020


On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 05:04:38PM +0800, Chao Leng wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2020/7/29 12:39, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > Dynamically allocating each one is possible but not very scalable.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The question is if there is some way, we can do this with on-stack
> > > > > > or a single on-heap rcu_head or equivalent that can achieve the same
> > > > > > effect.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If the hctx structures are guaranteed to stay put, you could count
> > > > > them and then do a single allocation of an array of rcu_head structures
> > > > > (or some larger structure containing an rcu_head structure, if needed).
> > > > > You could then sequence through this array, consuming one rcu_head per
> > > > > hctx as you processed it.  Once all the callbacks had been invoked,
> > > > > it would be safe to free the array.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sounds too simple, though.  So what am I missing?
> > > > 
> > > > We don't want higher-order allocations...
> > > 
> > > So:
> > > 
> > >    (1) We don't want to embed the struct in the hctx because we allocate
> > >    so many of them that this is non-negligable to add for something we
> > >    typically never use.
> > > 
> > >    (2) We don't want to allocate dynamically because it's potentially
> > >    huge.
> > > 
> > > As long as we're using srcu for blocking hctx's, I think it's "pick your
> > > poison".
> > > 
> > > Alternatively, Ming's percpu_ref patch(*) may be worth a look.
> > > 
> > >   * https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-block/msg56976.html1
> > I'm not opposed to having this. Will require some more testing
> > as this affects pretty much every driver out there..
> > 
> > If we are going with a lightweight percpu_ref, can we just do
> > it also for non-blocking hctx and have a single code-path?
> > .
> I tried to optimize the patch,support for non blocking queue and
> blocking queue.
> See next email.

Please see the following thread:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/05f75e89-b6f7-de49-eb9f-a08aa4e0ba4f@kernel.dk/

Both Keith and Jens didn't think it is a good idea.



Thanks,
Ming




More information about the Linux-nvme mailing list