Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 02/24] scsi: allocate separate queue for reserved
 commands
To:     Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
CC:     <axboe@kernel.dk>, <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        <martin.petersen@oracle.com>, <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
        <bvanassche@acm.org>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        <esc.storagedev@microsemi.com>, <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
References: <1583857550-12049-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <1583857550-12049-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <20200310183243.GA14549@infradead.org>
 <79cf4341-f2a2-dcc9-be0d-2efc6e83028a@huawei.com>
 <20200311062228.GA13522@infradead.org>
 <7bc94a9f-ec86-b343-0951-eba548c71b67@suse.de>
From:   John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <f9cd5ffc-4246-3815-d6ab-9d4f7535bcb8@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:51:18 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7bc94a9f-ec86-b343-0951-eba548c71b67@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 11/03/2020 06:58, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 3/11/20 7:22 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 09:08:56PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
>>> On 10/03/2020 18:32, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:25:28AM +0800, John Garry wrote:
>>>>> From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Allocate a separate 'reserved_cmd_q' for sending reserved commands.
>>>>
>>>> Why?  Reserved command specifically are not in any way tied to queues.
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>
>>> So the v1 series used a combination of the sdev queue and the per-host
>>> reserved_cmd_q. Back then you questioned using the sdev queue for virtio
>>> scsi, and the unconfirmed conclusion was to use a common per-host q. This is
>>> the best link I can find now:
>>>
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org/msg83177.html
>>
>> That was just a question on why virtio uses the per-device tags, which
>> didn't look like it made any sense.  What I'm worried about here is
>> mixing up the concept of reserved tags in the tagset, and queues to use
>> them.  Note that we already have the scsi_get_host_dev to allocate
>> a scsi_device and thus a request_queue for the host itself.  That seems
>> like the better interface to use a tag for a host wide command vs
>> introducing a parallel path.
>>
> Ah. Right.
> Will be looking into that, and convert the patchset over to it.
> 

Hannes,

I assume that you will take back over this series now. Let me know. The 
patches are here, if not in patchwork:
https://github.com/hisilicon/kernel-dev/tree/private-topic-sas-5.6-resv-commands-v2

> And the problem of the separate queue is the fact that I'll need a queue
> to reserve tags from; trying to allocate a tag directly from the bitmap
> turns out to be major surgery in the blocklayer with no immediate gain.
> And I can't use per-device queues as for some drivers the reserved
> commands are used to query the HBA itself to figure out how many devices
> are present.

Right, we still need to be able to allocate somewhere apart from sdev queue

> 


Thanks