Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758371AbXHNLNk (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:13:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756819AbXHNLN1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:13:27 -0400 Received: from phunq.net ([64.81.85.152]:47871 "EHLO moonbase.phunq.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755094AbXHNLNY (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:13:24 -0400 From: Daniel Phillips To: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: Block device throttling [Re: Distributed storage.] Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 04:13:10 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Jens Axboe , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra References: <20070731171347.GA14267@2ka.mipt.ru> <200708130604.07154.phillips@phunq.net> <20070814084625.GA20265@2ka.mipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <20070814084625.GA20265@2ka.mipt.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708140413.12530.phillips@phunq.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1508 Lines: 33 On Tuesday 14 August 2007 01:46, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 06:04:06AM -0700, Daniel Phillips (phillips@phunq.net) wrote: > > Perhaps you never worried about the resources that the device > > mapper mapping function allocates to handle each bio and so did not > > consider this hole significant. These resources can be > > significant, as is the case with ddsnap. It is essential to close > > that window through with the virtual device's queue limit may be > > violated. Not doing so will allow deadlock. > > This is not a bug, this is special kind of calculation - total limit > is number of physical devices multiplied by theirs limits. It was > done _on purpose_ to allow different device to have different limits > (for example in distributed storage project it is possible to have > both remote and local node in the same device, but local device > should not have _any_ limit at all, but network one should). > > Virtual device essentially has _no_ limit. And that as done on > purpose. And it will not solve the deadlock problem in general. (Maybe it works for your virtual device, but I wonder...) If the virtual device allocates memory during generic_make_request then the memory needs to be throttled. Regards, Daniel - 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/