> -----Original Message----- > From: James Bottomley [mailto:James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 1:27 PM > To: KY Srinivasan > Cc: gregkh@xxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ohering@xxxxxxxx; hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Staging: hv: storvsc: Move the storage driver out of the > staging area > > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 10:13 -0800, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote: > > The storage driver (storvsc_drv.c) handles all block storage devices > > assigned to Linux guests hosted on Hyper-V. This driver has been in the > > staging tree for a while and this patch moves it out of the staging area. > > As per Greg's recommendation, this patch makes no changes to the staging/hv > > directory. Once the driver moves out of staging, we will cleanup the > > staging/hv directory. > > > > This patch includes all the patches that I have sent against the staging/hv > > tree to address the comments I have gotten to date on this storage driver. > > First comment is that it would have been easier to see the individual > patches for comment before you committed them. I am not sure if the patches have been committed yet. All patches were sent to various mailing lists and you were copied as well. In the future, I will include the scsi mailing list in the set of lists I include for the staging patches. > > The way you did mempool isn't entirely right: the problem is that to > prevent a memory to I/O deadlock we need to ensure forward progress on > the drain device. Just having 64 commands available to the host doesn't > necessarily achieve this because LUN1 could consume them all and starve > LUN0 which is the drain device leading to the deadlock, so the mempool > really needs to be per device using slave_alloc. I will do this per LUN. > > +static int storvsc_device_alloc(struct scsi_device *sdevice) > +{ > + /* > + * This enables luns to be located sparsely. Otherwise, we may not > + * discovered them. > + */ > + sdevice->sdev_bflags |= BLIST_SPARSELUN | BLIST_LARGELUN; > + return 0; > +} > > Looks bogus ... this should happen automatically for SCSI-3 devices ... > unless your hypervisor has some strange (and wrong) identification? I > really think you want to use SCSI-3 because it will do report LUN > scanning, which consumes far fewer resources. I will see if I can clean this up. > > I still think you need to disable clustering and junk the bvec merge > function. Your object seems to be to accumulate in page size multiples > (and not aggregate over this) ... that's what clustering is designed to > do. As part of addressing your first round of comments, I experimented with your suggestions and I could not get rid of the code that does the bounce buffer handling. I could generate I/O patterns that would require bounce buffer handling with your suggestions in place. Regards, K. Y _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
