On Thursday, October 22, 2015 04:47 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello, On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 07:40:13AM -0700, Zhangqing Luo wrote: .... > So every time blk_mq_freeze_queue_start, it runs in this way > > blk_mq_freeze_queue_start > ->percpu_ref_kill->percpu_ref_kill_and_confirm > ->__percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic > ->call_rcu_sched(&ref->rcu,percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu) > > and blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait blocks on queue->mq_usage_counter > as it is not zero, and wake up by percpu_ref_switch_to_atomic_rcu > after a grace period > > > My question here is why should we change ref to PERCPU at blk_mq_finish_init? > because of this changing, delay appears. Because percpu operation is way cheaper than atomic ones and we want to optimize hot paths (request issue and completion) over cold paths (init and config changes). That's the whole point of percpu refcnting. The reason why percpu ref starts in atomic mode is to avoid expensive percpu freezing if the queue is created and abandoned in quick succession as SCSI does during LUN scanning. If percpu freezing is happening during that, the right solution is moving finish_init to late enough point so that percpu switching happens only after it's known that the queue won't be abandoned. Thanks.
I agree with the optimizing hot paths by cheaper percpu operation, but how much does it affect the performance? as you know the switching causes delay, when the the LUN number is increasing the delay is becoming higher, so do you have any idea about the problem? /Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
