linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: flush queued bios when the process blocks

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: <20140527200600.GG2276@kmo>
Date:	Tue, 27 May 2014 13:06:00 -0700
From:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
To:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, "Alasdair G. Kergon" <agk@...hat.com>,
	Mike Snitzer <msnitzer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: flush queued bios when the process blocks

On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 03:56:00PM -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 27 May 2014, Jens Axboe wrote:
> 
> > On 2014-05-27 10:26, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 May 2014, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 2014-05-27 09:23, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > The patch adds bio list flushing to the scheduler just besides plug
> > > > > flushsing.
> > > > 
> > > > ... which is exactly why I'm commenting. It'd be great to avoid yet one
> > > > more
> > > > scheduler hook for this sort of thing.
> > > > 
> > > > --
> > > > Jens Axboe
> > > 
> > > One could create something like schedule notifier chain, but I'm not sure
> > > if it is worth the complexity because of just two users. If more users
> > > come in the future, it could be generalized.
> > 
> > Except such a thing already exists, there are unplug callback chains. All I'm
> > asking is that you look into how feasible it would be to use something like
> > that, instead of reinventing the wheel.
> > 
> > -- 
> > Jens Axboe
> 
> Do you mean moving current->bio_list to struct blk_plug and calling 
> blk_start_plug/blk_finish_plug around generic_make_request?
> 
> It would be possible on a condition that we can redirect all bios to a 
> workqueue (i.e. eliminate bio_kmalloc and always use bio_alloc_bioset).
> 
> What are performance implications of this - does it make sense to have 
> blk_start_plug/blk_finish_plug around every call to generic_make_request? 
> - that means that all i/o requests will be added to a plug and then 
> unplugged.

We've already got blk_start_plug() calls around IO submission at higher points
in the stack. (I actually have seen it show up in profiles though, it probably
would be worth inlining and slimming down a bit).
--
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/