linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] blk-mq: make mq_queue_reinit

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: <54592D33.4080405@de.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2014 20:46:59 +0100
From:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org >> Linux Kernel Mailing List" 
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH block/for-linus] blk-mq: make mq_queue_reinit_notify()
 freeze queues in parallel

Am 04.11.2014 19:52, schrieb Tejun Heo:
> q->mq_usage_counter is a percpu_ref which is killed and drained when
> the queue is frozen.  On a CPU hotplug event, blk_mq_queue_reinit()
> which involves freezing the queue is invoked on all existing queues.
> Because percpu_ref killing and draining involve a RCU grace period,
> doing the above on one queue after another may take a long time if
> there are many queues on the system.
> 
> This patch splits out initiation of freezing and waiting for its
> completion, and updates blk_mq_queue_reinit_notify() so that the
> queues are frozen in parallel instead of one after another.  Note that
> freezing and unfreezing are moved from blk_mq_queue_reinit() to
> blk_mq_queue_reinit_notify().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Reported-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>

Thanks.

> ---
> Christian, can you please verify that this resolves the latency issue
> that you're seeing?  Jens, can you please route this patch once
> Christian confirms it?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>  block/blk-mq.c |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -107,11 +107,7 @@ static void blk_mq_usage_counter_release
>  	wake_up_all(&q->mq_freeze_wq);
>  }
> 
> -/*
> - * Guarantee no request is in use, so we can change any data structure of
> - * the queue afterward.
> - */
> -void blk_mq_freeze_queue(struct request_queue *q)
> +static void blk_mq_freeze_queue_start(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
>  	bool freeze;
> 
> @@ -123,9 +119,23 @@ void blk_mq_freeze_queue(struct request_
>  		percpu_ref_kill(&q->mq_usage_counter);
>  		blk_mq_run_queues(q, false);
>  	}
> +}
> +
> +static void blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
>  	wait_event(q->mq_freeze_wq, percpu_ref_is_zero(&q->mq_usage_counter));
>  }
> 
> +/*
> + * Guarantee no request is in use, so we can change any data structure of
> + * the queue afterward.
> + */
> +void blk_mq_freeze_queue(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
> +	blk_mq_freeze_queue_start(q);
> +	blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(q);
> +}
> +
>  static void blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
>  	bool wake;
> @@ -1921,7 +1931,7 @@ void blk_mq_free_queue(struct request_qu
>  /* Basically redo blk_mq_init_queue with queue frozen */
>  static void blk_mq_queue_reinit(struct request_queue *q)
>  {
> -	blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!q->mq_freeze_depth);
> 
>  	blk_mq_sysfs_unregister(q);
> 
> @@ -1936,8 +1946,6 @@ static void blk_mq_queue_reinit(struct r
>  	blk_mq_map_swqueue(q);
> 
>  	blk_mq_sysfs_register(q);
> -
> -	blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
>  }
> 
>  static int blk_mq_queue_reinit_notify(struct notifier_block *nb,
> @@ -1956,8 +1964,25 @@ static int blk_mq_queue_reinit_notify(st
>  		return NOTIFY_OK;
> 
>  	mutex_lock(&all_q_mutex);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * We need to freeze and reinit all existing queues.  Freezing
> +	 * involves synchronous wait for an RCU grace period and doing it
> +	 * one by one may take a long time.  Start freezing all queues in
> +	 * one swoop and then wait for the completions so that freezing can
> +	 * take place in parallel.
> +	 */
> +	list_for_each_entry(q, &all_q_list, all_q_node)
> +		blk_mq_freeze_queue_start(q);
> +	list_for_each_entry(q, &all_q_list, all_q_node)
> +		blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(q);
> +
>  	list_for_each_entry(q, &all_q_list, all_q_node)
>  		blk_mq_queue_reinit(q);
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(q, &all_q_list, all_q_node)
> +		blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
> +
>  	mutex_unlock(&all_q_mutex);
>  	return NOTIFY_OK;
>  }
> 

--
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/