From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] target: try satisfying memory requests with higher-order allocations
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:52:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1346957579.4162.504.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50486727.7060509@redhat.com>
On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 11:04 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/09/2012 03:58, Nicholas A. Bellinger ha scritto:
> >> This patch series fixes this problem by using higher-order allocations
> >> to build the data scatterlist. The problem is that iscsi assumes that the
> >> scatterlist consists of single pages, which is not true anymore. So
> >> patch 2 has to introduce some relatively complicated changes to
> >> iscsi_map_iovec and iscsi_unmap_iovec.
> >
> > So enabling multi-page per SGL support is a feature that has been
> > dormant within target core for a long time. It's about time that we
> > start taking advantage of it again. ;)
>
> Yeah, I noticed some preparation for it in tcm_fc/tfc_io.c, though too
> late (they look a lot like my iscsi changes, it would have saved me some
> time!).
>
> While this is obviously not to be taken lightly, I disagree with making
> this a per-fabric choice. With a properly organized (and bisectable)
> series, it should be relatively easy to review and to get right.
It's a temporary bit that allows us to figure out which fabrics can
(safely) be enabled for multi-page SGLs operation for the short term
within for-next code.
Unless your prepared to commit to fio+writeverify'ing 8x mainline fabric
drivers in many different types of fabric dependent I/O combination for
high order allocations, I'd still prefer to have some way to disable
this optimization in a per fabric basis if we really need too.
That way we can just disable a problematic fabric instead of having to
revert the whole thing if users run into problems with a specific fabric
module late during the cycle. If the other fabric maintainers are OK
with enabling this in their code and give their Reviewed-By's +
Tested-By's, then I have no problem dropping this extra bit once
everything has been converted.
> I looked a bit more closely now and there are no changes needed to other
> targets (actually there is a change needed in tcm_qla2xxx, but the code
> is currently disabled).
>
> There are however changes to transport_kmap_data_sg needed and a few
> other places.
>
> I definitely agree with your other comments, including making max_order
> a DEF_DEV_ATTRIB. In addition, the default max_order should be capped
> based on queue_max_sectors(q) if applicable, to avoid hitting this scenario:
>
> /*
> * XXX: if the length the device accepts is shorter than the
> * length of the S/G list entry this will cause and
> * endless loop. Better hope no driver uses huge pages.
> */
>
Mmmmm, indeed. Also, I'm not sure that every old SCSI LLD is smart
enough to handle high older allocations -> multi-page SGLs either..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-06 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-05 15:13 [RFC PATCH 0/3] target: try satisfying memory requests with higher-order allocations Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05 15:13 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] tcm_iscsi: warn on incorrect precondition for iscsit_do_crypto_hash_sg Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-05 15:13 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] tcm_iscsi: support multiple sizes in the scatterlist Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-06 2:33 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-05 15:13 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] target: try satisfying memory requests with contiguous blocks Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-06 2:19 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-06 1:58 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] target: try satisfying memory requests with higher-order allocations Nicholas A. Bellinger
2012-09-06 9:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-09-06 18:52 ` Nicholas A. Bellinger [this message]
2012-09-06 20:49 ` 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=1346957579.4162.504.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org \
--to=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).