All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, jasowang@redhat.com,
	mst@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	target-devel <target-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-scsi: introduce multiqueue support
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 19:21:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1346725294.4162.79.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1346154857-12487-6-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>

On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 13:54 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This patch adds queue steering to virtio-scsi.  When a target is sent
> multiple requests, we always drive them to the same queue so that FIFO
> processing order is kept.  However, if a target was idle, we can choose
> a queue arbitrarily.  In this case the queue is chosen according to the
> current VCPU, so the driver expects the number of request queues to be
> equal to the number of VCPUs.  This makes it easy and fast to select
> the queue, and also lets the driver optimize the IRQ affinity for the
> virtqueues (each virtqueue's affinity is set to the CPU that "owns"
> the queue).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> ---

Hey Paolo & Co,

I've not had a chance to try this with tcm_vhost just yet, but noticed
one thing wrt to assumptions about virtio_scsi_target_state->reqs access
below..

>  drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c |  162 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> index 6414ea0..0c4b096 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>  
>  #define VIRTIO_SCSI_MEMPOOL_SZ 64
>  #define VIRTIO_SCSI_EVENT_LEN 8
> +#define VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE 2
>  
>  /* Command queue element */
>  struct virtio_scsi_cmd {
> @@ -59,9 +60,13 @@ struct virtio_scsi_vq {
>  
>  /* Per-target queue state */
>  struct virtio_scsi_target_state {
> -	/* Protects sg.  Lock hierarchy is tgt_lock -> vq_lock.  */
> +	/* Protects sg, req_vq.  Lock hierarchy is tgt_lock -> vq_lock.  */
>  	spinlock_t tgt_lock;
>  
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq *req_vq;
> +
> +	atomic_t reqs;
> +
>  	/* For sglist construction when adding commands to the virtqueue.  */
>  	struct scatterlist sg[];
>  };
> @@ -70,14 +75,15 @@ struct virtio_scsi_target_state {
>  struct virtio_scsi {
>  	struct virtio_device *vdev;
>  
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq ctrl_vq;
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq event_vq;
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq req_vq;
> -
>  	/* Get some buffers ready for event vq */
>  	struct virtio_scsi_event_node event_list[VIRTIO_SCSI_EVENT_LEN];
>  
> +	u32 num_queues;
>  	struct virtio_scsi_target_state **tgt;
> +
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq ctrl_vq;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq event_vq;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq req_vqs[];
>  };
>  
>  static struct kmem_cache *virtscsi_cmd_cache;
> @@ -112,6 +118,9 @@ static void virtscsi_complete_cmd(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi, void *buf)
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd *cmd = buf;
>  	struct scsi_cmnd *sc = cmd->sc;
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd_resp *resp = &cmd->resp.cmd;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +
> +	atomic_dec(&tgt->reqs);
>  

As tgt->tgt_lock is taken in virtscsi_queuecommand_multi() before the
atomic_inc_return(tgt->reqs) check, it seems like using atomic_dec() w/o
smp_mb__after_atomic_dec or tgt_lock access here is not using atomic.h
accessors properly, no..?

>  	dev_dbg(&sc->device->sdev_gendev,
>  		"cmd %p response %u status %#02x sense_len %u\n",
> @@ -185,11 +194,13 @@ static void virtscsi_req_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
>  {
>  	struct Scsi_Host *sh = virtio_scsi_host(vq->vdev);
>  	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	int index = virtqueue_get_queue_index(vq) - VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq *req_vq = &vscsi->req_vqs[index];
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  
> -	spin_lock_irqsave(&vscsi->req_vq.vq_lock, flags);
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&req_vq->vq_lock, flags);
>  	virtscsi_vq_done(vscsi, vq, virtscsi_complete_cmd);
> -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vscsi->req_vq.vq_lock, flags);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&req_vq->vq_lock, flags);
>  };
>  
>  static void virtscsi_complete_free(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi, void *buf)
> @@ -429,10 +440,10 @@ static int virtscsi_kick_cmd(struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host *sh, struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi,
> +				 struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt,
> +				 struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
>  {
> -	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> -	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd *cmd;
>  	int ret;
>  
> @@ -466,7 +477,7 @@ static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host *sh, struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
>  	BUG_ON(sc->cmd_len > VIRTIO_SCSI_CDB_SIZE);
>  	memcpy(cmd->req.cmd.cdb, sc->cmnd, sc->cmd_len);
>  
> -	if (virtscsi_kick_cmd(tgt, &vscsi->req_vq, cmd,
> +	if (virtscsi_kick_cmd(tgt, tgt->req_vq, cmd,
>  			      sizeof cmd->req.cmd, sizeof cmd->resp.cmd,
>  			      GFP_ATOMIC) >= 0)
>  		ret = 0;
> @@ -475,6 +486,38 @@ out:
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand_single(struct Scsi_Host *sh,
> +					struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +
> +	atomic_inc(&tgt->reqs);
> +	return virtscsi_queuecommand(vscsi, tgt, sc);
> +}
> +

...

> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand_multi(struct Scsi_Host *sh,
> +				       struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	u32 queue_num;
> +
> +	/* Using an atomic_t for tgt->reqs lets the virtqueue handler
> +	 * decrement it without taking the spinlock.
> +	 */
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&tgt->tgt_lock, flags);
> +	if (atomic_inc_return(&tgt->reqs) == 1) {
> +		queue_num = smp_processor_id();
> +		while (unlikely(queue_num >= vscsi->num_queues))
> +			queue_num -= vscsi->num_queues;
> +		tgt->req_vq = &vscsi->req_vqs[queue_num];
> +	}
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tgt->tgt_lock, flags);
> +	return virtscsi_queuecommand(vscsi, tgt, sc);
> +}
> +

The extra memory barriers to get this right for the current approach are
just going to slow things down even more for virtio-scsi-mq..

After hearing Jen's blk-mq talk last week in San Diego + having a look
at the new code in linux-block.git/new-queue, the approach of using a
per-cpu lock-less-list  hw -> sw queue that uses IPI + numa_node hints
to make smart decisions for the completion path is making alot of sense.

Jen's approach is what we will ultimately need to re-architect in SCSI
core if we're ever going to move beyond the issues of legacy host_lock,
so I'm wondering if maybe this is the direction that virtio-scsi-mq
needs to go in as well..?

--nab


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	target-devel <target-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-scsi: introduce multiqueue support
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 19:21:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1346725294.4162.79.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1346154857-12487-6-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>

On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 13:54 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> This patch adds queue steering to virtio-scsi.  When a target is sent
> multiple requests, we always drive them to the same queue so that FIFO
> processing order is kept.  However, if a target was idle, we can choose
> a queue arbitrarily.  In this case the queue is chosen according to the
> current VCPU, so the driver expects the number of request queues to be
> equal to the number of VCPUs.  This makes it easy and fast to select
> the queue, and also lets the driver optimize the IRQ affinity for the
> virtqueues (each virtqueue's affinity is set to the CPU that "owns"
> the queue).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> ---

Hey Paolo & Co,

I've not had a chance to try this with tcm_vhost just yet, but noticed
one thing wrt to assumptions about virtio_scsi_target_state->reqs access
below..

>  drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c |  162 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> index 6414ea0..0c4b096 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/virtio_scsi.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
>  
>  #define VIRTIO_SCSI_MEMPOOL_SZ 64
>  #define VIRTIO_SCSI_EVENT_LEN 8
> +#define VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE 2
>  
>  /* Command queue element */
>  struct virtio_scsi_cmd {
> @@ -59,9 +60,13 @@ struct virtio_scsi_vq {
>  
>  /* Per-target queue state */
>  struct virtio_scsi_target_state {
> -	/* Protects sg.  Lock hierarchy is tgt_lock -> vq_lock.  */
> +	/* Protects sg, req_vq.  Lock hierarchy is tgt_lock -> vq_lock.  */
>  	spinlock_t tgt_lock;
>  
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq *req_vq;
> +
> +	atomic_t reqs;
> +
>  	/* For sglist construction when adding commands to the virtqueue.  */
>  	struct scatterlist sg[];
>  };
> @@ -70,14 +75,15 @@ struct virtio_scsi_target_state {
>  struct virtio_scsi {
>  	struct virtio_device *vdev;
>  
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq ctrl_vq;
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq event_vq;
> -	struct virtio_scsi_vq req_vq;
> -
>  	/* Get some buffers ready for event vq */
>  	struct virtio_scsi_event_node event_list[VIRTIO_SCSI_EVENT_LEN];
>  
> +	u32 num_queues;
>  	struct virtio_scsi_target_state **tgt;
> +
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq ctrl_vq;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq event_vq;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq req_vqs[];
>  };
>  
>  static struct kmem_cache *virtscsi_cmd_cache;
> @@ -112,6 +118,9 @@ static void virtscsi_complete_cmd(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi, void *buf)
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd *cmd = buf;
>  	struct scsi_cmnd *sc = cmd->sc;
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd_resp *resp = &cmd->resp.cmd;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +
> +	atomic_dec(&tgt->reqs);
>  

As tgt->tgt_lock is taken in virtscsi_queuecommand_multi() before the
atomic_inc_return(tgt->reqs) check, it seems like using atomic_dec() w/o
smp_mb__after_atomic_dec or tgt_lock access here is not using atomic.h
accessors properly, no..?

>  	dev_dbg(&sc->device->sdev_gendev,
>  		"cmd %p response %u status %#02x sense_len %u\n",
> @@ -185,11 +194,13 @@ static void virtscsi_req_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
>  {
>  	struct Scsi_Host *sh = virtio_scsi_host(vq->vdev);
>  	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	int index = virtqueue_get_queue_index(vq) - VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE;
> +	struct virtio_scsi_vq *req_vq = &vscsi->req_vqs[index];
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  
> -	spin_lock_irqsave(&vscsi->req_vq.vq_lock, flags);
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&req_vq->vq_lock, flags);
>  	virtscsi_vq_done(vscsi, vq, virtscsi_complete_cmd);
> -	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vscsi->req_vq.vq_lock, flags);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&req_vq->vq_lock, flags);
>  };
>  
>  static void virtscsi_complete_free(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi, void *buf)
> @@ -429,10 +440,10 @@ static int virtscsi_kick_cmd(struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> -static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host *sh, struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi,
> +				 struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt,
> +				 struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
>  {
> -	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> -	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
>  	struct virtio_scsi_cmd *cmd;
>  	int ret;
>  
> @@ -466,7 +477,7 @@ static int virtscsi_queuecommand(struct Scsi_Host *sh, struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
>  	BUG_ON(sc->cmd_len > VIRTIO_SCSI_CDB_SIZE);
>  	memcpy(cmd->req.cmd.cdb, sc->cmnd, sc->cmd_len);
>  
> -	if (virtscsi_kick_cmd(tgt, &vscsi->req_vq, cmd,
> +	if (virtscsi_kick_cmd(tgt, tgt->req_vq, cmd,
>  			      sizeof cmd->req.cmd, sizeof cmd->resp.cmd,
>  			      GFP_ATOMIC) >= 0)
>  		ret = 0;
> @@ -475,6 +486,38 @@ out:
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand_single(struct Scsi_Host *sh,
> +					struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +
> +	atomic_inc(&tgt->reqs);
> +	return virtscsi_queuecommand(vscsi, tgt, sc);
> +}
> +

...

> +static int virtscsi_queuecommand_multi(struct Scsi_Host *sh,
> +				       struct scsi_cmnd *sc)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_scsi *vscsi = shost_priv(sh);
> +	struct virtio_scsi_target_state *tgt = vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id];
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	u32 queue_num;
> +
> +	/* Using an atomic_t for tgt->reqs lets the virtqueue handler
> +	 * decrement it without taking the spinlock.
> +	 */
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&tgt->tgt_lock, flags);
> +	if (atomic_inc_return(&tgt->reqs) == 1) {
> +		queue_num = smp_processor_id();
> +		while (unlikely(queue_num >= vscsi->num_queues))
> +			queue_num -= vscsi->num_queues;
> +		tgt->req_vq = &vscsi->req_vqs[queue_num];
> +	}
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tgt->tgt_lock, flags);
> +	return virtscsi_queuecommand(vscsi, tgt, sc);
> +}
> +

The extra memory barriers to get this right for the current approach are
just going to slow things down even more for virtio-scsi-mq..

After hearing Jen's blk-mq talk last week in San Diego + having a look
at the new code in linux-block.git/new-queue, the approach of using a
per-cpu lock-less-list  hw -> sw queue that uses IPI + numa_node hints
to make smart decisions for the completion path is making alot of sense.

Jen's approach is what we will ultimately need to re-architect in SCSI
core if we're ever going to move beyond the issues of legacy host_lock,
so I'm wondering if maybe this is the direction that virtio-scsi-mq
needs to go in as well..?

--nab

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-04  2:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-28 11:54 [PATCH 0/5] Multiqueue virtio-scsi Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54 ` [PATCH 1/5] virtio-ring: move queue_index to vring_virtqueue Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-29  7:54   ` Jason Wang
2012-08-29  7:54     ` Jason Wang
2012-09-05 23:32   ` Rusty Russell
2012-09-05 23:32     ` Rusty Russell
2012-08-28 11:54 ` [PATCH 2/5] virtio: introduce an API to set affinity for a virtqueue Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05 23:32   ` Rusty Russell
2012-09-05 23:32     ` Rusty Russell
2012-08-28 11:54 ` [PATCH 3/5] virtio-scsi: allocate target pointers in a separate memory block Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 14:07   ` Sasha Levin
2012-08-28 14:07     ` Sasha Levin
2012-08-28 14:25     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 14:25       ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54 ` [PATCH 4/5] virtio-scsi: pass struct virtio_scsi to virtqueue completion function Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54 ` [PATCH 5/5] virtio-scsi: introduce multiqueue support Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-28 11:54   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04  2:21   ` Nicholas A. Bellinger [this message]
2012-09-04  2:21     ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-04  6:46     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04  6:46       ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04  8:46       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04  8:46         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 10:25         ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 10:25           ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 11:09           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 11:09             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 11:18             ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 11:18               ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 13:35               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 13:35                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 13:45                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 13:45                   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:19                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:19                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:25                     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:25                       ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 20:11       ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-04 20:11         ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-05  7:03         ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05  7:03           ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 12:48   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 12:48     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 13:49     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 13:49       ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:21       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:21         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:30         ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:30           ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:41           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:41             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:47   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:47     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 14:55     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 14:55       ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-04 15:03       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-09-04 15:03         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-08-30  7:13 ` [PATCH 0/5] Multiqueue virtio-scsi Stefan Hajnoczi
2012-08-30  7:13   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2012-08-30 14:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-08-30 14:53   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-08-30 15:45   ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-08-30 15:45     ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1346725294.4162.79.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org \
    --to=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.