Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:19:55 -0700
From:	Ming Lin <mlin@...nel.org>
To:	Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
	Dongsu Park <dpark@...teo.net>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	Lars Ellenberg <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>,
	drbd-user@...ts.linbit.com, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>, Jim Paris <jim@...n.com>,
	Joshua Morris <josh.h.morris@...ibm.com>,
	Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
	Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>,
	Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	Ming Lin <ming.l@....samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/11] block: make generic_make_request handle
 arbitrarily sized bios

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06 2015 at  3:44P -0400,
> Ming Lin <mlin@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
>>
>> The way the block layer is currently written, it goes to great lengths
>> to avoid having to split bios; upper layer code (such as bio_add_page())
>> checks what the underlying device can handle and tries to always create
>> bios that don't need to be split.
>>
>> But this approach becomes unwieldy and eventually breaks down with
>> stacked devices and devices with dynamic limits, and it adds a lot of
>> complexity. If the block layer could split bios as needed, we could
>> eliminate a lot of complexity elsewhere - particularly in stacked
>> drivers. Code that creates bios can then create whatever size bios are
>> convenient, and more importantly stacked drivers don't have to deal with
>> both their own bio size limitations and the limitations of the
>> (potentially multiple) devices underneath them.  In the future this will
>> let us delete merge_bvec_fn and a bunch of other code.
>>
>> We do this by adding calls to blk_queue_split() to the various
>> make_request functions that need it - a few can already handle arbitrary
>> size bios. Note that we add the call _after_ any call to
>> blk_queue_bounce(); this means that blk_queue_split() and
>> blk_recalc_rq_segments() don't need to be concerned with bouncing
>> affecting segment merging.
>>
>> Some make_request_fn() callbacks were simple enough to audit and verify
>> they don't need blk_queue_split() calls. The skipped ones are:
>>
>>  * nfhd_make_request (arch/m68k/emu/nfblock.c)
>>  * axon_ram_make_request (arch/powerpc/sysdev/axonram.c)
>>  * simdisk_make_request (arch/xtensa/platforms/iss/simdisk.c)
>>  * brd_make_request (ramdisk - drivers/block/brd.c)
>>  * mtip_submit_request (drivers/block/mtip32xx/mtip32xx.c)
>>  * loop_make_request
>>  * null_queue_bio
>>  * bcache's make_request fns
>>
>> Some others are almost certainly safe to remove now, but will be left
>> for future patches.
>>
>> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
>> Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
>> Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
>> Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
>> Cc: dm-devel@...hat.com
>> Cc: Lars Ellenberg <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>
>> Cc: drbd-user@...ts.linbit.com
>> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
>> Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Jim Paris <jim@...n.com>
>> Cc: Joshua Morris <josh.h.morris@...ibm.com>
>> Cc: Philip Kelleher <pjk1939@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>
>> Cc: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
>> Cc: Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
>> Acked-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de> (for the 'md/md.c' bits)
>> Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
>> [dpark: skip more mq-based drivers, resolve merge conflicts, etc.]
>> Signed-off-by: Dongsu Park <dpark@...teo.net>
>> Signed-off-by: Ming Lin <ming.l@....samsung.com>
> ...
>> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
>> index 30a0d9f..3707f30 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
>> @@ -9,12 +9,158 @@
>>
>>  #include "blk.h"
>>
>> +static struct bio *blk_bio_discard_split(struct request_queue *q,
>> +                                      struct bio *bio,
>> +                                      struct bio_set *bs)
>> +{
>> +     unsigned int max_discard_sectors, granularity;
>> +     int alignment;
>> +     sector_t tmp;
>> +     unsigned split_sectors;
>> +
>> +     /* Zero-sector (unknown) and one-sector granularities are the same.  */
>> +     granularity = max(q->limits.discard_granularity >> 9, 1U);
>> +
>> +     max_discard_sectors = min(q->limits.max_discard_sectors, UINT_MAX >> 9);
>> +     max_discard_sectors -= max_discard_sectors % granularity;
>> +
>> +     if (unlikely(!max_discard_sectors)) {
>> +             /* XXX: warn */
>> +             return NULL;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     if (bio_sectors(bio) <= max_discard_sectors)
>> +             return NULL;
>> +
>> +     split_sectors = max_discard_sectors;
>> +
>> +     /*
>> +      * If the next starting sector would be misaligned, stop the discard at
>> +      * the previous aligned sector.
>> +      */
>> +     alignment = (q->limits.discard_alignment >> 9) % granularity;
>> +
>> +     tmp = bio->bi_iter.bi_sector + split_sectors - alignment;
>> +     tmp = sector_div(tmp, granularity);
>> +
>> +     if (split_sectors > tmp)
>> +             split_sectors -= tmp;
>> +
>> +     return bio_split(bio, split_sectors, GFP_NOIO, bs);
>> +}
>
> This code to stop the discard at the previous aligned sector could be
> the reason why I have 2 device-mapper-test-suite tests in the
> 'thin-provisioning' testsuite failing due to this patchset:

I'm setting up the testsuite to debug.

Ming

>
>   4) Failure:
> test_discard_a_fragmented_device(DiscardQuickTests)
>     [/root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:49:in `block in assert_no_mappings'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:43:in `call'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:43:in `block in with_dev_md'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:40:in `each'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:40:in `with_dev_md'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:48:in `assert_no_mappings'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:263:in `test_discard_a_fragmented_device']:
> <0> expected but was
> <131072>.
>
>   5) Failure:
> test_discard_fully_provisioned_device_benchmark(DiscardQuickTests)
>     [/root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:49:in `block in assert_no_mappings'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:43:in `call'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:43:in `block in with_dev_md'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:40:in `each'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:40:in `with_dev_md'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:48:in `assert_no_mappings'
>      /root/snitm/git/device-mapper-test-suite/lib/dmtest/tests/thin-provisioning/discard_tests.rb:225:in `test_discard_fully_provisioned_device_benchmark']:
> <0> expected but was
> <262144>.
>
> But I haven't yet figured out where the blk_bio_discard_split code, or
> elsewhere, is going wrong.
>
> Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists