[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2a74e2c-31ac-e366-83d1-9837531daddf@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:33:40 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>,
"ming.lei@...hat.com" <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
"tom81094@...il.com" <tom81094@...il.com>,
"paolo.valente@...aro.org" <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"oleksandr@...alenko.name" <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
"john.garry@...wei.com" <john.garry@...wei.com>,
"osandov@...com" <osandov@...com>,
"loberman@...hat.com" <loberman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 4/6] blk-mq: introduce .get_budget and .put_budget in
blk_mq_ops
On 10/13/2017 10:31 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-10-14 at 00:07 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> Actually it is in hot path, for example, lpfc and qla2xx's queue depth is 3,
>
> Sorry but I doubt whether that is correct. More in general, I don't know any modern
> storage HBA for which the default queue depth is so low.
That does seem insanely low. BTW, even a low depth isn't an issue, as long as
we know what it roughly is.
--
Jens Axboe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists