Re: [PATCH] block: Fix warning when I/O elevator is changed as request_queue is being removed

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 3:38 AM, David Jeffery wrote: > There is a race between changing I/O elevator and request_queue removal > which can trigger the warning in kobject_add_internal. A program can > use sysfs to request a change of elevator at the same time another task >

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 06:06:11PM -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Laurence Oberman > wrote: > > > > > > > On 08/05/2017 02:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote: > > > >> In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we > >> found that I/O

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 01:29:41PM -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > > > On 08/07/2017 11:27 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 08:48 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > > > I tested this series using Ming's tests as well as my own set of tests > > > typically run against changes

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 18:06 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > With [mq-deadline] enabled on stock I dont see them at all and it behaves. > > Now with Ming's patches if we enable [mq-deadline] we DO see the clone > failures and the hard lockup so we have opposit behaviour with the > scheduler

Re: [PATCH 3/4] blk-mq: provide internal in-flight variant

On 08/04/2017 05:19 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 07:55:41AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 08/04/2017 05:17 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 02:01:55PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: We don't have to inc/dec some counter, since we can just iterate the tags. That

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On 08/07/2017 01:29 PM, Laurence Oberman wrote: On 08/07/2017 11:27 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 08:48 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: I tested this series using Ming's tests as well as my own set of tests typically run against changes to upstream code in my SRP

Re: Switching to MQ by default may generate some bug reports

> Il giorno 07 ago 2017, alle ore 19:32, Paolo Valente > ha scritto: > >> >> Il giorno 05 ago 2017, alle ore 00:05, Paolo Valente >> ha scritto: >> >>> >>> Il giorno 04 ago 2017, alle ore 13:01, Mel Gorman >>>

Re: Switching to MQ by default may generate some bug reports

> Il giorno 05 ago 2017, alle ore 13:54, Mel Gorman > ha scritto: > ... > >> In addition, as for coverage, we made the empiric assumption that >> start-up time measured with each of the above easy-to-benchmark >> applications gives an idea of the time that it would

Re: Switching to MQ by default may generate some bug reports

> Il giorno 05 ago 2017, alle ore 00:05, Paolo Valente > ha scritto: > >> >> Il giorno 04 ago 2017, alle ore 13:01, Mel Gorman >> ha scritto: >> >> On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 09:26:20AM +0200, Paolo Valente wrote: I took that into

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On 08/07/2017 11:27 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote: On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 08:48 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: I tested this series using Ming's tests as well as my own set of tests typically run against changes to upstream code in my SRP test-bed. My tests also include very large sequential

Re: nvmf question - synchronization between target/initiator regarding partitions

Thanks for your feedback Hannes, agreed! Cheers, Guilherme

Re: [PATCH 0/5] block: a virtual block device driver for testing

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 10:29:05AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 08/05/2017 05:51 PM, Shaohua Li wrote: > > From: Shaohua Li > > > > In testing software RAID, I usually found it's hard to cover specific cases. > > RAID is supposed to work even disk is in semi good state, for

Re: [PATCH] bio-integrity: revert "stop abusing bi_end_io"

Mikulas, > If you create the integrity tag at or above device mapper level, you > will run into problems because the same device can be accessed using > device mapper and using physical volume /dev/sd*. If you create > integrity tags at device mapper level, they will contain device > mapper's

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 08:48 -0400, Laurence Oberman wrote: > I tested this series using Ming's tests as well as my own set of tests > typically run against changes to upstream code in my SRP test-bed. > My tests also include very large sequential buffered and un-buffered I/O. > > This series

Re: nvmf question - synchronization between target/initiator regarding partitions

On 08/07/2017 03:42 PM, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: > We observed that it's possible to perform partition operations in both > nvmf target and initiator block devices, like creating and deleting > partitions. > > But there is no sync mechanism between target and initiator regarding > the

nvmf question - synchronization between target/initiator regarding partitions

We observed that it's possible to perform partition operations in both nvmf target and initiator block devices, like creating and deleting partitions. But there is no sync mechanism between target and initiator regarding the partitions operations. After creating a partition on initiator, for

Re: [PATCH] loop: fix to a race condition due to the early registration of device

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 04:09:12PM +0300, Anton Volkov wrote: > This is more of a style-oriented suggestion. This kind of template is > commonly used in other modules. Yes but there is no point in using gotos here (i.e. cleanup to be done), you an just return directly. And yes it is a minor nit.

Re: [PATCH] loop: fix to a race condition due to the early registration of device

This is more of a style-oriented suggestion. This kind of template is commonly used in other modules. Regards, Anton On 07.08.2017 15:54, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 03:37:50PM +0300, Anton Volkov wrote: +err_out: return err; Any reason you can't just use

Re: [PATCH] loop: fix to a race condition due to the early registration of device

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 03:37:50PM +0300, Anton Volkov wrote: > +err_out: > return err; Any reason you can't just use return err; at the respective callsites? Thanks, Johannes -- Johannes Thumshirn Storage jthumsh...@suse.de

Re: [PATCH V2 00/20] blk-mq-sched: improve SCSI-MQ performance

On 08/05/2017 02:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote: In Red Hat internal storage test wrt. blk-mq scheduler, we found that I/O performance is much bad with mq-deadline, especially about sequential I/O on some multi-queue SCSI devcies(lpfc, qla2xxx, SRP...) Turns out one big issue causes the performance

[PATCH] loop: fix to a race condition due to the early registration of device

The early device registration made possible a race leading to allocations of disks with wrong minors. This patch moves the device registration further down the loop_init function to make the race infeasible. Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org). Signed-off-by: Anton

Re: [PATCH 0/5] block: a virtual block device driver for testing

On 08/05/2017 05:51 PM, Shaohua Li wrote: > From: Shaohua Li > > In testing software RAID, I usually found it's hard to cover specific cases. > RAID is supposed to work even disk is in semi good state, for example, some > sectors are broken. Since we can't control the behavior of

Re: [PATCH 3/4] scsi: add Mylex RAID controller

On 08/05/2017 01:39 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Can you use normal linux style for the code instead of copy and > pasting the weird naming and capitalization from the DAC960 driver? > Yes; already planned for v2. But first wanted to get some general feedback (like: is anyone interested in that