On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 09:42:04PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-07-21 at 17:41 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 01:49:02PM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
> > > Our performance team has noticed that increasing
> > > RPCRDMA_MAX_DATA_SEGS from 8 to 64 significantly
> > > increases throughput when using the RDMA transport.
> >
> > The main risk that I can see being that we have on the stack in two
> > places:
> >
> > rpcrdma_register_fmr_external(struct rpcrdma_mr_seg *seg, ...
> > {
> > ...
> > u64 physaddrs[RPCRDMA_MAX_DATA_SEGS];
> >
> > rpcrdma_register_default_external(struct rpcrdma_mr_seg *seg, ...
> > {
> > ...
> > struct ib_phys_buf ipb[RPCRDMA_MAX_DATA_SEGS];
> >
> > Where ip_phys_buf is 16 bytes.
> >
> > So that's 512 bytes in the first case, 1024 in the second. This is
> > called from rpciod--what are our rules about allocating memory from
> > rpciod?
>
> Is that allocated on the stack? We should always try to avoid 1024-byte
> allocations on the stack, since that eats up a full 1/8th (or 1/4 in the
> case of 4k stacks) of the total stack space.
Right, it's on the stack, so I was wondering what we should do
instead....
> If, OTOH, that memory is being allocated dynamically, then the rule is
> "don't let rpciod sleep".
OK, so, looking around, the buf_alloc methods might provide examples to
follow for dynamic allocation here?
--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
