lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: protect completion path with RCU
Hello, Bart.

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 04:12:40PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> I'm concerned about the additional CPU cycles needed for the new blk_mq_map_queue()
> call, although I know this call is cheap. Would the timeout code really get that

So, if that is really a concern, let's cache that mapping instead of
changing synchronization rules for that.

> much more complicated if the hctx_lock() and hctx_unlock() calls would be changed
> into rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() calls? Would it be sufficient if
> "if (has_rcu) synchronize_rcu();" would be changed into "synchronize_rcu();" in
> blk_mq_timeout_work()?

Code-wise, it won't be too much extra code but I think diverging the
sync methods between issue and completion paths is more fragile and
likely to invite confusions and mistakes in the future. We have the
normal path (issue&completion) synchronizing against the exception
path (timeout). I think it's best to keep the sync constructs aligned
with that conceptual picture.

Thanks.

--
tejun

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-14 23:19    [W:0.720 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site