linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Pomerantz <bapper@piratehaven.org>
To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com>
Cc: Chaitanya Tumuluri <chait@getafix.engr.sgi.com>,
	Eric Youngdale <eric@andante.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu, chait@sgi.com, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: PATCH: Enhance queueing/scsi-midlayer to handle kiobufs. [Re: Request splits]
Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 09:17:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000519091718.A4083@skull.piratehaven.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20000519165502.G9961@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 19, 2000 at 04:55:02PM +0100, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, May 19, 2000 at 08:48:42AM -0700, Brian Pomerantz wrote:
> 
> > > The real solution is probably not to increase the atomic I/O size, but
> > > rather to pipeline I/Os.  That is planned for the future, and now there
> > 
> > That really depends on the device characteristics.  This Ciprico
> > hardware I've been working with really only performs well if the
> > atomic I/O size is >= 1MB.  Once you introduce additional transactions
> > across the bus, your performance drops significantly.  I guess it is a
> > tradeoff between latency and bandwidth.  Unless you mean the low level
> > device would be handed a vector of kiobufs and it would build a single
> > SCSI request with that vector,
> 
> ll_rw_block can already do that, but...
> 
> > then I suppose it would work well but
> > the requests would have to make up a contiguous chunk of drive space.
> 
> ... a single request _must_, by definition, be contiguous.  There is
> simply no way for the kernel to deal with non-contiguous atomic I/Os.
> I'm not sure what you're talking about here --- how can an atomic I/O
> be anything else?  We can do scatter-gather, but only from scattered
> memory, not to scattered disk blocks.
> 

I may just be confused about how this whole thing works still.  I had
to go change the number of SG segments the QLogic driver allocates and
reports to the SCSI middle layer to a larger number otherwise the
transaction gets split up and I no longer have a single 1MB
transaction but four 256KB transactions.  The number of segments it
was set to was 32 (8KB * 32 = 256KB).  So the question I have is in
the end when you do this pipelining, if you don't increase the atomic
I/O size, will the device attached to the SCSI bus (or FC) still
receive a single request or will it quickly see a bunch of smaller
requests?  My point is, from my experiments with this RAID device, you
will run across situations where it is good to be able to make a
single SCSI request be quite large in order to achieve better
performance.


BAPper
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/

  reply	other threads:[~2000-05-19 16:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <00c201bfc0d7$56664db0$4d0310ac@fairfax.datafocus.com>
     [not found] ` <200005181955.MAA71492@getafix.engr.sgi.com>
2000-05-19 15:09   ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-05-19 15:48     ` Brian Pomerantz
2000-05-19 15:55       ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2000-05-19 16:17         ` Brian Pomerantz [this message]
2000-05-19 18:00           ` Chaitanya Tumuluri
2000-05-19 18:11           ` Gérard Roudier
2000-05-19 19:24             ` Brian Pomerantz
2000-05-19 20:43               ` Gérard Roudier
2000-05-20  9:10                 ` Change direct I/O memory model? [Was Re: PATCH: Enhance queueing/scsi-midlayer to handle kiobufs] Mark Mokryn
2000-05-19 17:53         ` PATCH: Enhance queueing/scsi-midlayer to handle kiobufs. [Re: Request splits] Chaitanya Tumuluri
2000-05-19 17:38     ` Chaitanya Tumuluri
2000-05-23 21:58     ` Chaitanya Tumuluri

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20000519091718.A4083@skull.piratehaven.org \
    --to=bapper@piratehaven.org \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=chait@getafix.engr.sgi.com \
    --cc=chait@sgi.com \
    --cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
    --cc=eric@andante.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.rutgers.edu \
    --cc=sct@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox