linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cfq-iosched: replace sync_flight by rq_in_driver[BLK_RW

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4e5e476b0912301250x4a0de523v8c1d0a03720c8fa8@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:50:34 +0100
From:	Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	Gui Jianfeng <guijianfeng@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfq-iosched: replace sync_flight by rq_in_driver[BLK_RW_SYNC]

On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30 2009, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
>> According to my intuition (and brief testing), sync_flight is always
>> equal to rq_in_driver[BLK_RW_SYNC] at the point of usage, so it can
>> be removed and replaced by the other.
>
> They are not fully identical. ->sync_flight is incremented on insertion
> on the dispatch list, ->rq_in_driver not until the request is activated
> (eg the driver has retrieved it and wants to dispatch to the hardware).
Usually (only exceptions are forced dispatch, or when a conflict in the
rb tree is found), a request is activated as soon as cfq returns from
cfq_dispatch_requests.

> They will usually be identical, but that may not be true for requeues
> for instance.

For our purpose, it is sufficient that in cfq_may_dispatch, they are either
both 0 or both non-0.
Since we have sync_flight >= rq_in_driver[1], the only question is:
can the number of requests in the driver drop to 0 with requests still
in flight?

I'm asking because to drain async requests, we are using the rq_in_driver
counter instead. Maybe they need the same treatment.

Thanks
Corrado

>
> --
> Jens Axboe
>
>
--
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/