On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 05:33:13PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 11:13 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:35:29AM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 11:31 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:11:42PM +, Bart
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 05:33:13PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Are you aware that the SCSI core already keeps track of the number of busy
> requests
> per LUN? See also the device_busy member of struct scsi_device. How about
> giving the
> block layer core access in some way to that counter?
On Thu, 2017-08-03 at 11:13 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:35:29AM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 11:31 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:11:42PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 18:50 +0800, Ming Lei
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:35:29AM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 11:31 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:11:42PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 18:50 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:17:18PM +0800, Ming
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 11:31 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:11:42PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 18:50 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:17:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > How can we get the accurate 'number of requests in
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 03:11:42PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 18:50 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:17:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > How can we get the accurate 'number of requests in progress' efficiently?
>
> Hello Ming,
>
> How about
On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 18:50 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:17:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > How can we get the accurate 'number of requests in progress' efficiently?
Hello Ming,
How about counting the number of bits that have been set in the tag set?
I am aware that these
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 06:17:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:34:35PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 00:51 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > SCSI devices use host-wide tagset, and the shared
> > > driver tag space is often quite big. Meantime
> > >
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:34:35PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 00:51 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > SCSI devices use host-wide tagset, and the shared
> > driver tag space is often quite big. Meantime
> > there is also queue depth for each lun(.cmd_per_lun),
> > which is often
On Tue, 2017-08-01 at 00:51 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> SCSI devices use host-wide tagset, and the shared
> driver tag space is often quite big. Meantime
> there is also queue depth for each lun(.cmd_per_lun),
> which is often small.
>
> So lots of requests may stay in sw queue, and we
> always
SCSI devices use host-wide tagset, and the shared
driver tag space is often quite big. Meantime
there is also queue depth for each lun(.cmd_per_lun),
which is often small.
So lots of requests may stay in sw queue, and we
always flush all belonging to same hw queue and
dispatch them all to driver,
11 matches
Mail list logo
