All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>,
	dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] block: switch to per-cpu in-flight counters
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:49:42 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181205174942.GA9838@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d6a741cd-ea75-19d0-13e3-eb1321e617b4@kernel.dk>

On Wed, Dec 05 2018 at 12:30pm -0500,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:

> On 11/30/18 3:22 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > diff --git a/block/genhd.c b/block/genhd.c
> > index cdf174d7d329..d4c9dd65def6 100644
> > --- a/block/genhd.c
> > +++ b/block/genhd.c
> > @@ -45,53 +45,76 @@ static void disk_add_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  static void disk_del_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  static void disk_release_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  
> > -void part_inc_in_flight(struct request_queue *q, struct hd_struct *part, int rw)
> > +void part_inc_in_flight(struct request_queue *q, int cpu, struct hd_struct *part, int rw)
> >  {
> >  	if (queue_is_mq(q))
> >  		return;
> >  
> > -	atomic_inc(&part->in_flight[rw]);
> > +	local_inc(&per_cpu_ptr(part->dkstats, cpu)->in_flight[rw]);
> 
> I mentioned this in a previous email, but why isn't this just using
> this_cpu_inc?

I responded to your earlier question on this point but, Mikulas just
extended the existing percpu struct disk_stats and he is using local_t
for reasons detailed in this patch's header:

    We use the local-atomic type local_t, so that if part_inc_in_flight or
    part_dec_in_flight is reentrantly called from an interrupt, the value will
    be correct.

    The other counters could be corrupted due to reentrant interrupt, but the
    corruption only results in slight counter skew - the in_flight counter
    must be exact, so it needs local_t.

> There's also no need to pass in the cpu, if we're not running with
> preempt disabled already we have a problem. 

Why should this be any different than the part_stat_* interfaces?
__part_stat_add(), part_stat_read(), etc also use
per_cpu_ptr((part)->dkstats, (cpu) accessors.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com,
	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] block: switch to per-cpu in-flight counters
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 12:49:42 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181205174942.GA9838@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d6a741cd-ea75-19d0-13e3-eb1321e617b4@kernel.dk>

On Wed, Dec 05 2018 at 12:30pm -0500,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:

> On 11/30/18 3:22 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > diff --git a/block/genhd.c b/block/genhd.c
> > index cdf174d7d329..d4c9dd65def6 100644
> > --- a/block/genhd.c
> > +++ b/block/genhd.c
> > @@ -45,53 +45,76 @@ static void disk_add_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  static void disk_del_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  static void disk_release_events(struct gendisk *disk);
> >  
> > -void part_inc_in_flight(struct request_queue *q, struct hd_struct *part, int rw)
> > +void part_inc_in_flight(struct request_queue *q, int cpu, struct hd_struct *part, int rw)
> >  {
> >  	if (queue_is_mq(q))
> >  		return;
> >  
> > -	atomic_inc(&part->in_flight[rw]);
> > +	local_inc(&per_cpu_ptr(part->dkstats, cpu)->in_flight[rw]);
> 
> I mentioned this in a previous email, but why isn't this just using
> this_cpu_inc?

I responded to your earlier question on this point but, Mikulas just
extended the existing percpu struct disk_stats and he is using local_t
for reasons detailed in this patch's header:

    We use the local-atomic type local_t, so that if part_inc_in_flight or
    part_dec_in_flight is reentrantly called from an interrupt, the value will
    be correct.

    The other counters could be corrupted due to reentrant interrupt, but the
    corruption only results in slight counter skew - the in_flight counter
    must be exact, so it needs local_t.

> There's also no need to pass in the cpu, if we're not running with
> preempt disabled already we have a problem. 

Why should this be any different than the part_stat_* interfaces?
__part_stat_add(), part_stat_read(), etc also use
per_cpu_ptr((part)->dkstats, (cpu) accessors.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-05 17:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-28  0:42 [PATCH 0/3] per-cpu in_flight counters for bio-based drivers Mikulas Patocka
2018-11-28  0:42 ` Mikulas Patocka
2018-11-30 14:43 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 14:43   ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 15:50   ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 15:50     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 19:57     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 19:57       ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] " Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 1/6] dm: dont rewrite dm_disk(md)->part0.in_flight Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 2/6] dm rq: leverage blk_mq_queue_busy() to check for outstanding IO Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 3/6] block: delete part_round_stats and switch to less precise counting Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 4/6] block: switch to per-cpu in-flight counters Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 17:30     ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 17:30       ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 17:49       ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2018-12-05 17:49         ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 17:54         ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 17:54           ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 18:03           ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 18:03             ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 18:04             ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 18:04               ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 18:18               ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 18:18                 ` Mike Snitzer
2018-12-05 18:35                 ` Jens Axboe
2018-12-05 18:35                   ` Jens Axboe
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 5/6] block: return just one value from part_in_flight Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22   ` [PATCH v2 6/6] dm: remove the pending IO accounting Mike Snitzer
2018-11-30 22:22     ` Mike Snitzer

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=20181205174942.GA9838@redhat.com \
    --to=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
    /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.