[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1317080052-6052-1-git-send-email-hkchu@google.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:34:12 -0700
From: "H.K. Jerry Chu" <hkchu@...gle.com>
To: davem@...emloft.net
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Break up the single NBD lock into one per NBD device
From: Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
This patch breaks up the single NBD lock into one per
disk. The single NBD lock has become a serious performance
bottleneck when multiple NBD disks are being used.
The original comment on why a single lock may be ok no
longer holds for today's much faster NICs.
Signed-off-by: H.K. Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
---
drivers/block/nbd.c | 22 +++++++++-------------
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/nbd.c b/drivers/block/nbd.c
index f533f33..355e15c 100644
--- a/drivers/block/nbd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/nbd.c
@@ -58,20 +58,9 @@ static unsigned int debugflags;
static unsigned int nbds_max = 16;
static struct nbd_device *nbd_dev;
+static spinlock_t *nbd_locks;
static int max_part;
-/*
- * Use just one lock (or at most 1 per NIC). Two arguments for this:
- * 1. Each NIC is essentially a synchronization point for all servers
- * accessed through that NIC so there's no need to have more locks
- * than NICs anyway.
- * 2. More locks lead to more "Dirty cache line bouncing" which will slow
- * down each lock to the point where they're actually slower than just
- * a single lock.
- * Thanks go to Jens Axboe and Al Viro for their LKML emails explaining this!
- */
-static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(nbd_lock);
-
#ifndef NDEBUG
static const char *ioctl_cmd_to_ascii(int cmd)
{
@@ -753,6 +742,12 @@ static int __init nbd_init(void)
if (!nbd_dev)
return -ENOMEM;
+ nbd_locks = kcalloc(nbds_max, sizeof(*nbd_locks), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!nbd_locks) {
+ kfree(nbd_dev);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+
part_shift = 0;
if (max_part > 0) {
part_shift = fls(max_part);
@@ -784,7 +779,7 @@ static int __init nbd_init(void)
* every gendisk to have its very own request_queue struct.
* These structs are big so we dynamically allocate them.
*/
- disk->queue = blk_init_queue(do_nbd_request, &nbd_lock);
+ disk->queue = blk_init_queue(do_nbd_request, &nbd_locks[i]);
if (!disk->queue) {
put_disk(disk);
goto out;
@@ -832,6 +827,7 @@ out:
put_disk(nbd_dev[i].disk);
}
kfree(nbd_dev);
+ kfree(nbd_locks);
return err;
}
--
1.7.3.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists