From: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
To: Kanchan Joshi <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] block: wire-up support for passthrough plugging
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 22:21:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YnPdW7T8JVRsNeno@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 11:36:13AM +0530, Kanchan Joshi wrote:
> From: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>
> Add support for plugging in passthrough path. When plugging is enabled, the
> requests are added to a plug instead of getting dispatched to the driver.
> And when the plug is finished, the whole batch gets dispatched via
> ->queue_rqs which turns out to be more efficient. Otherwise dispatching
> used to happen via ->queue_rq, one request at a time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> ---
> block/blk-mq.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 84d749511f55..2cf011b57cf9 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -2340,6 +2340,40 @@ void __blk_mq_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq,
> blk_mq_hctx_mark_pending(hctx, ctx);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Allow 2x BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT requests on plug queue for multiple
> + * queues. This is important for md arrays to benefit from merging
> + * requests.
> + */
> +static inline unsigned short blk_plug_max_rq_count(struct blk_plug *plug)
> +{
> + if (plug->multiple_queues)
> + return BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT * 2;
> + return BLK_MAX_REQUEST_COUNT;
> +}
> +
> +static void blk_add_rq_to_plug(struct blk_plug *plug, struct request *rq)
> +{
> + struct request *last = rq_list_peek(&plug->mq_list);
> +
> + if (!plug->rq_count) {
> + trace_block_plug(rq->q);
> + } else if (plug->rq_count >= blk_plug_max_rq_count(plug) ||
> + (!blk_queue_nomerges(rq->q) &&
> + blk_rq_bytes(last) >= BLK_PLUG_FLUSH_SIZE)) {
> + blk_mq_flush_plug_list(plug, false);
> + trace_block_plug(rq->q);
> + }
> +
> + if (!plug->multiple_queues && last && last->q != rq->q)
> + plug->multiple_queues = true;
> + if (!plug->has_elevator && (rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELV))
> + plug->has_elevator = true;
> + rq->rq_next = NULL;
> + rq_list_add(&plug->mq_list, rq);
> + plug->rq_count++;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * blk_mq_request_bypass_insert - Insert a request at dispatch list.
> * @rq: Pointer to request to be inserted.
> @@ -2353,7 +2387,12 @@ void blk_mq_request_bypass_insert(struct request *rq, bool at_head,
> bool run_queue)
> {
> struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx = rq->mq_hctx;
> + struct blk_plug *plug = current->plug;
>
> + if (plug) {
> + blk_add_rq_to_plug(plug, rq);
> + return;
> + }
This way looks a bit fragile.
blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() is called for dispatching io request too,
such as blk_insert_cloned_request(), then the request may be inserted to
scheduler finally from blk_mq_flush_plug_list().
Another issue in blk_execute_rq(), the request may stay in plug list
before polling, then hang forever.
Just wondering why not adding the pt request to plug in blk_execute_rq_nowait()
explicitly?
Thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-05 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20220505061142epcas5p2c943572766bfd5088138fe0f7873c96c@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] io_uring passthrough for nvme Kanchan Joshi
[not found] ` <CGME20220505061144epcas5p3821a9516dad2b5eff5a25c56dbe164df@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] fs,io_uring: add infrastructure for uring-cmd Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-05 12:52 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 13:48 ` Ming Lei
2022-05-05 13:54 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 13:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-05 16:17 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 17:04 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-06 7:12 ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-10 14:23 ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-10 14:35 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <CGME20220505061146epcas5p3919c48d58d353a62a5858ee10ad162a0@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] block: wire-up support for passthrough plugging Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-05 14:21 ` Ming Lei [this message]
[not found] ` <CGME20220505061148epcas5p188618b5b15a95cbe48c8c1559a18c994@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] nvme: refactor nvme_submit_user_cmd() Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-05 13:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-05 18:37 ` Clay Mayers
2022-05-05 19:03 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 19:11 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 19:30 ` Clay Mayers
2022-05-05 19:31 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 19:50 ` hch
2022-05-05 20:44 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-06 5:56 ` hch
[not found] ` <CGME20220505061150epcas5p2b60880c541a4b2f144c348834c7cbf0b@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] nvme: wire-up uring-cmd support for io-passthru on char-device Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-05 13:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-05 13:38 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 13:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-05 13:50 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 17:23 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-06 8:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-06 13:37 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-06 14:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-06 14:57 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-07 5:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-07 12:53 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-09 6:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-09 12:52 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] ` <CGME20220505061151epcas5p2523dc661a0daf3e6185dee771eade393@epcas5p2.samsung.com>
2022-05-05 6:06 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] nvme: add vectored-io support for uring-cmd Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-05 18:20 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] io_uring passthrough for nvme Jens Axboe
2022-05-05 18:29 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-06 6:42 ` Kanchan Joshi
2022-05-06 13:14 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-10 7:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-05-10 12:29 ` Jens Axboe
2022-05-10 14:21 ` Kanchan Joshi
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=YnPdW7T8JVRsNeno@T590 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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