[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] xen/blkback: Don't let in-flight requests defer pending ones.

["Vincent, Pradeep" <pradeepv@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Opportunistically avoiding interrupts by checking for I/Os in the flight
doesn't sound like a bad idea. I think the RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS
call and what follows should be retained in 'make_response'.

Also, should RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS be protected by blk_ring_lock ?


- Pradeep Vincent


On 5/28/11 1:21 PM, "Daniel Stodden" <daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Running RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS from make_response is a bad
>idea. It means that in-flight I/O is essentially blocking continued
>batches. This essentially kills throughput on frontends which unplug
>(or even just notify) early and rightfully assume addtional requests
>will be picked up on time, not synchronously.
>
>Signed-off-by: Daniel Stodden <daniel.stodden@xxxxxxxxxx>
>---
> drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c |   36
>++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>index 9dee545..48ad7fa 100644
>--- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>+++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/blkback.c
>@@ -451,7 +451,8 @@ static void end_block_io_op(struct bio *bio, int
>error)
>  * (which has the sectors we want, number of them, grant references,
>etc),
>  * and transmute  it to the block API to hand it over to the proper
>block disk.
>  */
>-static int do_block_io_op(struct xen_blkif *blkif)
>+static int
>+__do_block_io_op(struct xen_blkif *blkif)
> {
>     union blkif_back_rings *blk_rings = &blkif->blk_rings;
>     struct blkif_request req;
>@@ -508,6 +509,23 @@ static int do_block_io_op(struct xen_blkif *blkif)
>     return more_to_do;
> }
> 
>+static int
>+do_block_io_op(blkif_t *blkif)
>+{
>+    blkif_back_rings_t *blk_rings = &blkif->blk_rings;
>+    int more_to_do;
>+
>+    do {
>+        more_to_do = __do_block_io_op(blkif);
>+        if (more_to_do)
>+            break;
>+
>+        RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(&blk_rings->common, more_to_do);
>+    } while (more_to_do);
>+
>+    return more_to_do;
>+}
>+
> /*
>  * Transmutation of the 'struct blkif_request' to a proper 'struct bio'
>  * and call the 'submit_bio' to pass it to the underlying storage.
>@@ -698,7 +716,6 @@ static void make_response(struct xen_blkif *blkif,
>u64 id,
>     struct blkif_response  resp;
>     unsigned long     flags;
>     union blkif_back_rings *blk_rings = &blkif->blk_rings;
>-    int more_to_do = 0;
>     int notify;
> 
>     resp.id        = id;
>@@ -725,22 +742,7 @@ static void make_response(struct xen_blkif *blkif,
>u64 id,
>     }
>     blk_rings->common.rsp_prod_pvt++;
>     RING_PUSH_RESPONSES_AND_CHECK_NOTIFY(&blk_rings->common, notify);
>-    if (blk_rings->common.rsp_prod_pvt == blk_rings->common.req_cons) {
>-        /*
>-         * Tail check for pending requests. Allows frontend to avoid
>-         * notifications if requests are already in flight (lower
>-         * overheads and promotes batching).
>-         */
>-        RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(&blk_rings->common, more_to_do);
>-
>-    } else if (RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(&blk_rings->common)) {
>-        more_to_do = 1;
>-    }
>-
>     spin_unlock_irqrestore(&blkif->blk_ring_lock, flags);
>-
>-    if (more_to_do)
>-        blkif_notify_work(blkif);
>     if (notify)
>         notify_remote_via_irq(blkif->irq);
> }
>-- 
>1.7.4.1
>


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel