Re: mpt3sas fails to allocate budget_map and detects no devices

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

 



On Wed, 2022-01-12 at 17:59 +0100, Martin Wilck wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-01-10 at 10:59 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > 
> > Hello Martin Wilck,
> > 
> > Can you test the following change and report back the result?
> > 
> > From 480a61a85e9669d3487ebee8db3d387df79279fc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> > From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 10:26:59 +0800
> > Subject: [PATCH] scsi: core: reallocate scsi device's budget map if
> > default
> >  queue depth is changed
> > 
> > Martin reported that sdev->queue_depth can often be changed in
> > ->slave_configure(), and now we uses ->cmd_per_lun as initial queue
> > depth for setting up sdev->budget_map. And some extreme -
> > >cmd_per_lun
> > or ->can_queue won't be used at default actually, if we they are
> > used
> > to allocate sdev->budget_map, huge memory may be consumed just
> > because
> > of bad ->cmd_per_lun.
> > 
> > Fix the issue by reallocating sdev->budget_map after -
> > > slave_configure()
> > returns, at that time, queue_depth should be much more reasonable.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@xxxxxxxx>
> > Suggested-by: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@xxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> This looks good. I added a few pr_infos, and for the strange mpt3sas
> devices I reported, I get this:
> 
> # first allocation with depth=7 (cmds_per_lun)
> Jan 12 17:05:52 localhost kernel: scsi_realloc_sdev_budget_map: 7 0-
> >0 
>    (these numbers are: depth old_shift->new_shift)
> Jan 12 17:05:52 localhost kernel: scsi_realloc_sdev_budget_map:
> map_nr = 1024
> 
> # after slave_alloc() with depth 254
> Jan 12 17:05:52 localhost kernel: scsi_realloc_sdev_budget_map: 254
> 0->5
> Jan 12 17:05:52 localhost kernel: scsi_realloc_sdev_budget_map:
> map_nr = 32
> 
> So the depth changed from 7 to 254, the shift from 0 to 5, and the
> memory size of the
> sbitmap was reduced by a factor of 32. Nice!
> 
> Tested-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@xxxxxxxx>

So, how do we proceed with this patch?

Regards
Martin





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux