Message-ID: <8f49b95e-88df-48b8-9311-8a15414d8107@vivo.com>
Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 15:48:49 +0800
From: YangYang <yang.yang@...o.com>
To: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@...hat.com>
Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@...hat.com>, Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...nel.org>,
 Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>, dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] dm: support retrieving struct dm_target from struct
 dm_dev

On 2024/5/16 23:29, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 09:55:53AM +0800, YangYang wrote:
>> On 2024/5/15 23:42, Benjamin Marzinski wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:04:42PM +0800, Yang Yang wrote:
>>>> Add a list to the struct dm_dev structure to store the associated
>>>> targets, while also allowing differentiation between different target
>>>> types.
>>>
>>> I still think this is more complex than it needs to be. If devices that
>>> support flush_pass_around can guarantee that:
>>>
>>> 1. They will send a flush bio to all of their table devices
>>> 2. They are fine with another target sending the flush bio to their
>>>      table devices
>>>
>>> Then I don't see why we need the table devices to keep track of all the
>>> different target types that are using them. Am I missing something here?
>>
>> I attempted to enhance this solution to support additional target types,
>> such as those with num_flush_bios greater than 1.
> 
> I'm still missing why sending a flush to each target type is necessary
> to handle num_flush_bios > 1. As long as the targets meet the
> requirements I listed before, AFAICS it should still work with only one
> of the targets mapped to each device.
> 
> Say the table devices are sda, sdb, sdc, and sdd.  If you have 4 linear
> targets, each mapped to a different table device, and one stripe target
> mapped to all of them.  It doesn't really matter if you don't call
> __send_empty_flush_bios() for the stripe target, does it? all if its
> stripe devs will still get flushes. Similarly, it's fine if one of the
> linear targets doesn't get called (in fact it's fine if all the linear
> targets don't get called, since the stripe target will send flushes to
> all the devices). If there were only 3 linear targets, then the stripe
> target would get linked to a table device, so it would get a flush sent
> to it. Can you explain a situation where you need the to send a flush to
> multiple targets per table device for this to work, if you assume the 2
> guarantees I mentioned above (the target sends flushes to all their
> devices, and they don't do something special so they need to be the one
> to send the flushes).

Yes, if the targets meet the requirements you listed previously, there
is no need to send a flush to each target type.
I think I may be overthinking this. I tried to handle some targets with
num_flush_bios > 1 that don't meet the requirements.

>>
>>> If we don't need to worry about sending a flush bio to a target of each
>>> type that is using a table device, then all we need to do is call
>>> __send_empty_flush_bios() for enough targets to cover all the table
>>> devices. This seems a lot easier to track. We just need another flag in
>>> dm_target, something like sends_pass_around_flush.
>>>
>>> When a target calls dm_get_device(), if it adds a new table device to
>>> t->devices, then it's the first target in this table to use that device.
>>> If flush_pass_around is set for this target, then it also sets
>>> sends_pass_around_flush. In __send_empty_flush() if the table has
>>> flush_pass_around set, when you iterate through the devices, you only
>>> call __send_empty_flush_bios() for the ones with sends_pass_around_flush
>>> set.
>>>
>>> Or am I overlooking something?
>>
>> If I understand correctly, you are suggesting to iterate through all the
>> targets, handling those with sends_pass_around_flush set, and skipping
>> those where sends_pass_around_flush is not set. I believe this approach
>> may result in some CPU wastage.
>>
>>    for i in {0..1023}; do
>>      echo $((8000*$i)) 8000 linear /dev/sda2 $((16384*$i))
>>    done | sudo dmsetup create example
>>
>> In this specific scenario, a single iteration of the loop is all that
>> is needed.
> 
> It's just one iteration of the loop either way. You either loop through
> the targets or the devices.  It's true that if you have lots of targets
> all mapped to the same device, you would waste time looping through all
> the targets instead of looping through the devices.  But if you only had
> one striped target mapped to lots of devices, you would waste time
> looping through all of the devices instead of looping through the
> targets.

Yes, I get your point. This patchset may make things even worse for
the striped target.
I am just curious, in what scenario is the "dm-strip" target mapped to
a large number of underlying devices from the same block device.

> -Ben
>   
>>>
>>> -Ben
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Yang <yang.yang@...o.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/md/dm-table.c         | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    include/linux/device-mapper.h |  3 +++
>>>>    2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-table.c b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>>>> index bd68af10afed..f6554590b7af 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-table.c
>>>> @@ -741,6 +741,8 @@ int dm_table_add_target(struct dm_table *t, const char *type,
>>>>    	if (ti->flush_pass_around == 0)
>>>>    		t->flush_pass_around = 0;
>>>> +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ti->list);
>>>> +
>>>>    	return 0;
>>>>     bad:
>>>> @@ -2134,6 +2136,25 @@ void dm_table_postsuspend_targets(struct dm_table *t)
>>>>    	suspend_targets(t, POSTSUSPEND);
>>>>    }
>>>> +static int dm_link_dev_to_target(struct dm_target *ti, struct dm_dev *dev,
>>>> +		sector_t start, sector_t len, void *data)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct list_head *targets = &dev->targets;
>>>> +	struct dm_target *pti;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!list_empty(targets)) {
>>>> +		list_for_each_entry(pti, targets, list) {
>>>> +			if (pti->type == ti->type)
>>>> +				return 0;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (list_empty(&ti->list))
>>>> +		list_add_tail(&ti->list, targets);
>>>> +
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>    int dm_table_resume_targets(struct dm_table *t)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	unsigned int i;
>>>> @@ -2162,6 +2183,21 @@ int dm_table_resume_targets(struct dm_table *t)
>>>>    			ti->type->resume(ti);
>>>>    	}
>>>> +	if (t->flush_pass_around) {
>>>> +		struct list_head *devices = &t->devices;
>>>> +		struct dm_dev_internal *dd;
>>>> +
>>>> +		list_for_each_entry(dd, devices, list)
>>>> +			INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dd->dm_dev->targets);
>>>> +
>>>> +		for (i = 0; i < t->num_targets; i++) {
>>>> +			struct dm_target *ti = dm_table_get_target(t, i);
>>>> +
>>>> +			if (ti->type->iterate_devices)
>>>> +				ti->type->iterate_devices(ti, dm_link_dev_to_target, NULL);
>>>> +		}
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>>    	return 0;
>>>>    }
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/device-mapper.h b/include/linux/device-mapper.h
>>>> index 0893ff8c01b6..19e03f9b2589 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/device-mapper.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/device-mapper.h
>>>> @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ struct dm_dev {
>>>>    	struct dax_device *dax_dev;
>>>>    	blk_mode_t mode;
>>>>    	char name[16];
>>>> +	struct list_head targets;
>>>>    };
>>>>    /*
>>>> @@ -298,6 +299,8 @@ struct dm_target {
>>>>    	struct dm_table *table;
>>>>    	struct target_type *type;
>>>> +	struct list_head list;
>>>> +
>>>>    	/* target limits */
>>>>    	sector_t begin;
>>>>    	sector_t len;
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>
>>>
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists