Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 12 May 2020 15:55:01 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Cc:     Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@gmail.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, axboe@kernel.dk,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@gmail.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@gmail.com>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] block: Extand commit_rqs() to do batch
 processing
Message-ID: <20200512075501.GF1531898@T590>
References: <20200508214639.GA1389136@T590>
 <fe6bd8b9-6ed9-b225-f80c-314746133722@grimberg.me>
 <20200508232222.GA1391368@T590>
 <CADBw62ooysT7TJ5CjpPBC6zs7pvpUQysg8QqP9oW5jN7BSYS7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200509094306.GA1414369@T590>
 <6579459b-aa98-78f2-f805-a6cd46f37b6c@grimberg.me>
 <20200511012942.GA1418834@T590>
 <8f2ddabc-01d0-dae9-f958-1b26a6bdf58c@grimberg.me>
 <20200511114731.GA1525935@T590>
 <9dc69d5a-b4f3-23a6-e033-377b4e133f97@grimberg.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9dc69d5a-b4f3-23a6-e033-377b4e133f97@grimberg.me>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:26:07PM -0700, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> 
> > > devices will benefit from the batching so maybe the flag needs to be
> > > inverted? BLK_MQ_F_DONT_BATCHING_SUBMISSION?
> > 
> > Actually I'd rather to not add any flag, and we may use some algorithm
> > (maybe EWMA or other intelligent stuff, or use hctx->dispatch_busy directly)
> > to figure out one dynamic batching number which is used to dequeue requests
> > from scheduler or sw queue.
> > 
> > Then just one single dispatch io code path is enough.
> 
> Sounds good to me, do you plan to submit a patchset?
> 

Yeah, I am working on that.


Thanks,
Ming