Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932151AbXACW0m (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:26:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932154AbXACW0m (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:26:42 -0500 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([62.242.22.158]:9897 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932151AbXACW0l (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:26:41 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 23:29:31 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: "Chen, Kenneth W" Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin , Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH] 4/4 block: explicit plugging Message-ID: <20070103222930.GL11203@kernel.dk> References: <20070103082202.GG11203@kernel.dk> <98F3657447CE934E9ADA3A348D854FB602858A4F@scsmsx414.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <98F3657447CE934E9ADA3A348D854FB602858A4F@scsmsx414.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1766 Lines: 44 On Wed, Jan 03 2007, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > Jens Axboe wrote on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 12:22 AM > > > Do you have any benchmarks which got faster with these changes? > > > > On the hardware I have immediately available, I see no regressions wrt > > performance. With instrumentation it's simple to demonstrate that most > > of the queueing activity of an io heavy benchmark spends less time in > > the kernel (most merging activity takes place outside of the queue > lock, > > hence queueing is lock free). > > > > I've asked Ken to run this series on some of his big iron, I hope > he'll > > have some results for us soonish. > > We are having some trouble with the patch set that some of our fiber > channel > host controller doesn't initialize properly anymore and thus lost whole > bunch > of disks (somewhere around 200 disks out of 900) at boot time. > Presumably FC > loop initialization command are done through block layer etc. I haven't > looked into the problem closely. > > Jens, I assume the spin lock bug in __blk_run_queue is fixed in this > patch > set? It is. Are you still seeing problems after the initial mail exchange we had prior to christmas, or are you referencing that initial problem? It's not likely to be a block layer issue, more likely the SCSI <-> block interactions. If you mail me a new dmesg (if your problem is with the __blk_run_queue() fixups), I can take a look. Otherwise please do test with the __blk_run_queue() fixup, just use the current patchset. -- Jens Axboe - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/