Re: [PATCH][RFC 13/23]: Export of alloc_io_context() function

[Vladislav Bolkhovitin]

Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11 2008, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> > Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 10 2008, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> > > > This patch exports alloc_io_context() function. For performance reasons 
> > > > SCST queues commands using a pool of IO threads. It is considerably 
> > > > better for performance (>30% increase on sequential reads) if threads in 
> > > >  a pool have the same IO context. Since SCST can be built as a module, 
> > > > it needs alloc_io_context() function exported.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  block/blk-ioc.c |    1 +
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff -upkr linux-2.6.27.2/block/blk-ioc.c linux-2.6.27.2/block/blk-ioc.c
> > > > --- linux-2.6.27.2/block/blk-ioc.c	2008-10-10 02:13:53.000000000 +0400
> > > > +++ linux-2.6.27.2/block/blk-ioc.c	2008-11-25 21:27:01.000000000 +0300
> > > > @@ -105,6 +105,7 @@ struct io_context *alloc_io_context(gfp_
> > > >
> > > > 	return ret;
> > > > }
> > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(alloc_io_context);
> > > Why is this needed, can't you just use CLONE_IO?
> > There are two reasons for that:
> >
> > 1. kthread interface doesn't support passing CLONE_IO flag.
>
> Then you fix that instead of working around it! :-)

It doesn't worth the effort, because of (2) below.

> > 2. Each (virtual) device has own pool of threads, which serves it. 
> > Threads in each such pools should have a common IO context, but 
> > different pools should have different IO contexts. So, it would be 
> > necessary to implement two levels start of IO threads in each pool. At 
> > first, one thread would be started. Then it would call get_io_context() 
> > to gain io_context. Then it would create the remaining threads with 
> > CLONE_IO flag. Definitely, it's a lot more complicated than a simple 
> > call of alloc_io_context() and assignment of the returned context to 
> > each just created thread in a loop before they were ran.
>
> Just start the first thread without CLONE_IO, and subsequent threads
> fork off that with CLONE_IO set? 

Yes, that would be the two stages threads creation. A *LOT* more 
complicated, than with the direct io_context assignment using 
alloc_io_context().

> I think we need to make sure that we
> allocate an IO context for the 'parent' if it doesn't have one already
> and CLONE_IO is set, but that is something that can easily be rectified.

Sorry, I don't feel I understood you here..

> It may seem more complex, but if you use this approach you are pretty
> much free to worry about any changes in the future there.

Worrying about future changes is regular in Linux kernel, where there is 
no stable API ;-)


--
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/