On 3/3/21 6:09 PM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2021, JeffleXu wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 3/3/21 3:05 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
>>
>>> Support I/O polling if submit_bio_noacct_mq_direct returned non-empty
>>> cookie.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/md/dm.c | 5 +++++
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm.c
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm.c 2021-03-02 19:26:34.000000000 +0100
>>> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm.c 2021-03-02 19:26:34.000000000 +0100
>>> @@ -1682,6 +1682,11 @@ static void __split_and_process_bio(stru
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> + if (ci.poll_cookie != BLK_QC_T_NONE) {
>>> + while (atomic_read(&ci.io->io_count) > 1 &&
>>> + blk_poll(ci.poll_queue, ci.poll_cookie, true)) ;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> /* drop the extra reference count */
>>> dec_pending(ci.io, errno_to_blk_status(error));
>>> }
>>
>> It seems that the general idea of your design is to
>> 1) submit *one* split bio
>> 2) blk_poll(), waiting the previously submitted split bio complets
>
> No, I submit all the bios and poll for the last one.
>
>> and then submit next split bio, repeating the above process. I'm afraid
>> the performance may be an issue here, since the batch every time
>> blk_poll() reaps may decrease.
>
> Could you benchmark it?
>
I will once I finished some other issues.
>> Besides, the submitting routine and polling routine is bound together
>> here, i.e., polling is always synchronous.
>
> __split_and_process_bio calls __split_and_process_non_flush in a loop
I also noticed that you sent this patch.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dm-devel/patch/alpine.LRH.2.02.2103010457510.631@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
I agree with you that this while() loop here is unnecessary. And thus
there's no loop calling __split_and_process_non_flush() in
__split_and_process_bio().
> __split_and_process_non_flush records the poll cookie in ci.poll_cookie.
> When we processed all the bios, we poll for the last cookie here:
>
> if (ci.poll_cookie != BLK_QC_T_NONE) {
> while (atomic_read(&ci.io->io_count) > 1 &&
> blk_poll(ci.poll_queue, ci.poll_cookie, true)) ;
> }
So what will happen if one bio submitted to dm device crosses the device
boundary among several target devices (e.g., dm-stripe)? Please refer
the following call graph.
```
submit_bio
__submit_bio_noacct
disk->fops->submit_bio(), calling into __split_and_process_bio(),
call __split_and_process_non_flush() once, submitting the *first* split bio
disk->fops->submit_bio(), calling into __split_and_process_bio(),
call __split_and_process_non_flush() once, submitting the *second* split bio
...
```
So the loop is in __submit_bio_noacct(), rather than
__split_and_process_bio(). Your design will send the first split bio,
and then poll on this split bio, then send the next split bio, polling
on this, go on and on...
--
Thanks,
Jeffle
