Re: [RFC] block: enqueue splitted bios into same cpu

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thanks for replying. ;)


On 9/11/20 7:01 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:29:58AM +0800, Jeffle Xu wrote:
Splitted bios of one source bio can be enqueued into different CPU since
the submit_bio() routine can be preempted or fall asleep. However this
behaviour can't work well with iopolling.
Do you have user visible problem wrt. io polling? If yes, can you
provide more details?

No, there's no practical example yet. It's only a hint from the code base.



Currently block iopolling only polls the hardwar queue of the input bio.
If one bio is splitted to several bios, one (bio 1) of which is enqueued
into CPU A, while the others enqueued into CPU B, then the polling of bio 1
will cotinuously poll the hardware queue of CPU A, though the other
splitted bios may be in other hardware queues.
If it is guaranteed that the returned cookie is from bio 1, poll is
supposed to work as expected, since bio 1 is the chained head of these
bios, and the whole fs bio can be thought as done when bio1 .end_bio
is called.
Yes, it is, thanks for your explanation. But except for polling if the input bio has completed, one of the

important work of polling logic is to reap the completion queue. Let's say one bio is split into

two bios, bio 1 and bio 2, both of which are enqueued into the same hardware queue.When polling bio1,

though we have no idea about bio2 at all, the polling logic itself is still reaping the completion queue of

this hardware queue repeatedly, in which case the polling logic still stimulates reaping bio2.


Then what if these two split bios enqueued into two different hardware queue? Let's say bio1 is enqueued

into hardware queue A, while bio2 is enqueued into hardware queue B. When polling bio1, though the polling

logic is repeatedly reaping the completion queue of hardware queue A, it doesn't help reap bio2. bio2 is reaped

by IRQ as usual. This certainly works currently, but this behavior may deviate the polling design? I'm not sure.


In other words, if we can ensure that all split bios are enqueued into the same hardware queue, then the polling

logic *may* be faster.



The iopolling logic has no idea if the input bio is splitted bio, or if
it has other splitted siblings. Thus ensure that all splitted bios are
enqueued into one CPU at the beginning.
Yeah, that is why io poll can't work on DM.

Exactly I'm interested in dm polling. The polling of bio to dm device can be mapped into the polling of the

several underlying device. Except for the the design of the cookie, currently I have not found other blocking

points technically. Please let me know if I missed something.

This is only one RFC patch and it is not complete since dm/mq-scheduler
have not been considered yet. Please let me know if it is on the correct
direction or not.

Besides I have one question on the split routine. Why the split routine
is implemented in a recursive style? Why we can't split the bio one time
and then submit the *already splitted* bios one by one?
Forward progress has to be provided on new splitted bio allocation which
is from same bio_set.
Sorry I can't understand this. Is this a suggestion on how to improving this patch, or a reply to the question

why the split routine is implemented in a recursive style? Would you please provide more details?


Thanks,
Ming


Thanks,

Jeffle




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux