On Thu, Jun 6, 2024 at 7:34 AM Alexander Aring <aahringo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Heming, > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 10:48 PM Heming Zhao <heming.zhao@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 6/6/24 02:54, Alexander Aring wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 5:56 PM Alexander Aring <aahringo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> Recently the DLM subsystem introduced the flag DLM_LSFL_SOFTIRQ for > > >> dlm_new_lockspace() to signal the capability to handle DLM ast/bast > > >> callbacks in softirq context to avoid an additional context switch due > > >> the DLM callback workqueue. > > >> > > >> The md-cluster implementation only does synchronized calls above the > > >> async DLM API. That synchronized API should may be also offered by DLM, > > >> however it is very simple as md-cluster callbacks only does a complete() > > >> call for their wait_for_completion() wait that is occurred after the > > >> async DLM API call. This patch activates the recently introduced > > >> DLM_LSFL_SOFTIRQ flag that allows that the DLM callbacks are executed in > > >> a softirq context that md-cluster can handle. It is reducing a > > >> unnecessary context workqueue switch and should speed up DLM in some > > >> circumstance. > > >> > > > > > > Can somebody with a md-cluster environment test it as well? All I was > > > doing was (with a working dlm_controld cluster env): > > > > > > mdadm --create /dev/md0 --bitmap=clustered --metadata=1.2 > > > --raid-devices=2 --level=mirror /dev/sda /dev/sdb > > > > > > sda and sdb are shared block devices on each node. > > > > > > Create a /etc/mdadm.conf with the content mostly out of: > > > > > > mdadm --detail --scan > > > > > > on each node. > > > > > > Then call mdadm --assemble on all nodes where not "mdadm --create ..." happened. > > > I hope that is the right thing to do and I had with "dlm_tool ls" a > > > UUID as a lockspace name with some md-cluster locks being around. > > > > The above setup method is correct. > > SUSE doc [1] provides more details on assembling the clustered array. > > > > yea, I saw that and mostly cut it down into the necessary steps in my > development setup. > > Thanks for confirming I did something right here. > > > [1]: https://documentation.suse.com/fr-fr/sle-ha/15-SP5/html/SLE-HA-all/cha-ha-cluster-md.html#sec-ha-cluster-md-create > > > > > > > > To bring this new flag upstream, would it be okay to get this through > > > dlm-tree? I am requesting here for an "Acked-by" tag from the md > > > maintainers. > > > > > > > I compiled & tested the dlm-tree [2] with SUSE CI env, and didn't see these > > patches introduce new issue. > > > > Thanks for doing that. So that means you tried the dlm-tree with this > patch series applied? > > Song or Yu, can I get an "Acked-by" from you and an answer if it is > okay that this md-cluster.c patch goes upstream via dlm-tree? LGTM. Acked-by: Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx> Yes, let's route this via dlm-tree. Thanks, Song
