[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALzYo32AnNzENe414GDVivaF5wXQ7azaysBYkN9wHVYEW27NPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 00:00:40 +0200
From: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@...os.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@...il.com>,
Linux NVDIMM <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
jmoyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/2] virtio-pmem: Async virtio-pmem flush
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Thank you for the review. Please see my reply inline.
> >
> > > > Implement asynchronous flush for virtio pmem using work queue
> > > > to solve the preflush ordering issue. Also, coalesce the flush
> > > > requests when a flush is already in process.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@...os.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> > > > drivers/nvdimm/virtio_pmem.c | 10 ++++-
> > > > drivers/nvdimm/virtio_pmem.h | 14 +++++++
> > > > 3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c b/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > > index 10351d5b49fa..61b655b583be 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > > @@ -97,29 +97,69 @@ static int virtio_pmem_flush(struct nd_region *nd_region)
> > > > return err;
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > +static void submit_async_flush(struct work_struct *ws);
> > > > +
> > > > /* The asynchronous flush callback function */
> > > > int async_pmem_flush(struct nd_region *nd_region, struct bio *bio)
> > > > {
> > > > - /*
> > > > - * Create child bio for asynchronous flush and chain with
> > > > - * parent bio. Otherwise directly call nd_region flush.
> > > > + /* queue asynchronous flush and coalesce the flush requests */
> > > > + struct virtio_device *vdev = nd_region->provider_data;
> > > > + struct virtio_pmem *vpmem = vdev->priv;
> > > > + ktime_t req_start = ktime_get_boottime();
> > > > +
> > > > + spin_lock_irq(&vpmem->lock);
> > > > + /* flush requests wait until ongoing flush completes,
> > > > + * hence coalescing all the pending requests.
> > > > */
> > > > - if (bio && bio->bi_iter.bi_sector != -1) {
> > > > - struct bio *child = bio_alloc(GFP_ATOMIC, 0);
> > > > -
> > > > - if (!child)
> > > > - return -ENOMEM;
> > > > - bio_copy_dev(child, bio);
> > > > - child->bi_opf = REQ_PREFLUSH;
> > > > - child->bi_iter.bi_sector = -1;
> > > > - bio_chain(child, bio);
> > > > - submit_bio(child);
> > > > - return 0;
> > > > + wait_event_lock_irq(vpmem->sb_wait,
> > > > + !vpmem->flush_bio ||
> > > > + ktime_before(req_start, vpmem->prev_flush_start),
> > > > + vpmem->lock);
> > > > + /* new request after previous flush is completed */
> > > > + if (ktime_after(req_start, vpmem->prev_flush_start)) {
> > > > + WARN_ON(vpmem->flush_bio);
> > > > + vpmem->flush_bio = bio;
> > > > + bio = NULL;
> > > > + }
> > >
> > > Why the dance with ->prev_flush_start vs just calling queue_work()
> > > again. queue_work() is naturally coalescing in that if the last work
> > > request has not started execution another queue attempt will be
> > > dropped.
> >
> > How parent flush request will know when corresponding flush is completed?
>
> The eventual bio_endio() is what signals upper layers that the flush
> completed...
>
>
> Hold on... it's been so long that I forgot that you are copying
> md_flush_request() here. It would help immensely if that was mentioned
> in the changelog and at a minimum have a comment in the code that this
> was copied from md. In fact it would be extra helpful if you
My bad. I only mentioned this in the cover letter.
> refactored a common helper that bio based block drivers could share
> for implementing flush handling, but that can come later.
Sure.
>
> Let me go re-review this with respect to whether the md case is fully
> applicable here.
o.k.
Best regards,
Pankaj
Powered by blists - more mailing lists