lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE and non-block-mq
From
On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> while investigating the crash in scsi_lib.c I found a rather curious
> behaviour for QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE.
>
> While the flag is evaluated in blk_recalc_rq_segments and
> blk_recount_segments (resulting in nr_phys_segments being
> computed based on that flag) it is completely ignored
> during blk_rq_map_sg() or the actual merging itself.

Yes, I guess Jens introduced the flag for decreasing CPU
consumption when comuputing segments, but it is still
ignored by blk_rq_map_sg(), but it may not be used
by some drivers.

After bio splitting is introduced, the flag is also ignored
when computing segments.

>
> This typically shouldn't be an issue, seeing that with
> QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE nr_phys_segments will always be
> larger than the actual segment count.
>
> However, it still makes me wonder:
> What is the point of having a QUEUE_FLAG_NO_SG_MERGE
> which doesn't work as advertised?
> Or, to be precise, which only works for blk-mq?
> Should we make it work for non-block-mq, too?

Thanks bio splitting, this flag has little effect on performance now,
so I think it can be removed if Jens has no objection.

Thanks,

>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hannes
> --
> Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage
> hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688
> SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
> GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton
> HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-26 10:41    [W:0.044 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site