Re: [PATCH] block: fix q->max_segment_size checking inblk_recalc_rq_segments about VMERGE
From: FUJITA Tomonori
Date: Thu Jul 24 2008 - 22:28:01 EST
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:49:14 -0400 (EDT)
Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 12:34 -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 2008-07-24 at 11:07 -0400, Mikulas Patocka wrote:
> > > > > So try to #define BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY 0 for Pa-Risc and tell us what
> > > > > performance degradation do you see (and what driver do you use and what is
> > > > > the I/O pattern).
> > > > >
> > > > > If you show something specific, we can consider that --- but you haven't
> > > > > yet told us anything, except generic talk.
> > > >
> > > > You keep ignoring inconvenient facts. For about the third time:
> > > >
> > > > I run a test bed for sg_tables (large chaining of requests). This runs
> > > > on parisc using virtual merging (has to because the final physical table
> > > > size can't go over the sg list of the SCSI card). If I turn off virtual
> > > > merging I can no longer test sg_tables in vanilla kernels.
> > > >
> > > > James
> > >
> > > What sg_tables test do you mean? What does the test do? Why couldn't you
> > > run the test if BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY is 0? Normal I/O obviously can work
> > > with BIO_VMERGE_BOUNDARY 0, the kernel will just send more smaller
> >
> > Look, if you don't really understand what I'm doing, it's not really my
> > job to educate you. The sg_table discussions are on marc.info, mainly
> > on the SCSI lists; just look for 'sg chaining' in the header (need to
> > use google site ... marc's search is bad).
> >
> > You can complain if the code is impacting you ... but I believe I've
> > optimised it so it isn't. Your basic problem amounts to you not liking
> > me doing something that has no impact on you ... I'm afraid that's what
> > freedom leads to (shocking, I know).
> >
> > James
>
> Chaining of sg_tables is used for drivers with big sg tables --- and
> vmerge counting is used for drivers with small sg tables. So what do they
> have in common?
VMERGE enables you to handle a large request even with drivers with
small sg tables.
> Summary, what I mean:
>
> * in blk-merge.c, you have 85 lines, that is 16% of the size of the file,
> devoted to counting of hw_segments
>
> * it is only used on two architectures, one already outdated (alpha), the
> other being discontinued (pa-risc). On all the other architectures,
> hw_segments == phys_segments
BTW, alpha IOMMU can't handle VMERGE. But the IOMMU has the code to
handle VMERGE so one-line patch can fix the IOMMU.
As I said before, can we leave this to Jens, keeping or removing
VMERGE? Seems that I see the same arguments again and again.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/