From patchwork Tue Mar 5 13:40:41 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Christoph Hellwig X-Patchwork-Id: 13582418 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B90D8615A for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709646050; cv=none; b=e4CLZwXWTtpPn7DmxJVu4HkY3UwO66L4EC1Ph2HVZqvqVZbc9+exjN0Uq+xfRhYGKnarr0W4uVBKhAbrSbyt4EivzFau1r3E8MNIzkrPRB7hv2rzGbJ2SC16H/6xdK97XMw+MzZfgNprW1QfRXTW3NfdIvubXmWM5eZLsXcxop0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709646050; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QyWcRrNxVgK384e9YKYldUdazeaevTm41k1lsqyTxkw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=KGCdAlgysN1EGJtVTMnYL7em6mMT0FommshhI0+g2cBI7x+s7dDNVm8UROZN6ENCi9MbzJy0W+mcQK5vWm9XxxE8VAT/4Gh0K/uuyDIPbQALWuVqg3QgiIGArka3Z/7l1dghe72RHS+ibv+5Ahhh58zNtU0DevmDBfJHvUV5G9Y= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=RLgA+UhI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="RLgA+UhI" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender :Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=fs+hHzeY50NjZ+wR6CygHlhg6UmFfdzm3awOpeO+YYg=; b=RLgA+UhInXIE1bKXuhC8w9AVUm VqQ+Rqt84ukF0fJbaimZ03kclW6G8eHGodix2gT85jEX+UIFzR1qfqSgzgUUJTgF+Hl8NQVQvdwUr T6YdOYhChJ7MRj0U4WjF/lkXC+6HRQWoap82E/wqiAOMnCJqbG5scpmJYHGWoYfsUWr+S98eOymPV r0qdgrjTzvZfAakrxyp4O5bQhHasfXcu3roYA4WtzPcXp60sJrT1WECfzy0o5m6YwagUxNiL0nt+c EMFdbYrswcJJNe6O4ZEhQWAki8yvY9giwmbJI9GmglQo/0Ce7EaNT4AEKGLAlK3SKQVYxLqstvO3o 6BcsEoOg==; Received: from [50.219.53.154] (helo=localhost) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rhV2G-0000000Dqyt-1SBp; Tue, 05 Mar 2024 13:40:48 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Philipp Reisner , Lars Ellenberg , =?utf-8?q?Christoph_B=C3=B6hmwa?= =?utf-8?q?lder?= , Jens Axboe Cc: drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 7/7] drbd: atomically update queue limits in drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 06:40:41 -0700 Message-Id: <20240305134041.137006-8-hch@lst.de> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 In-Reply-To: <20240305134041.137006-1-hch@lst.de> References: <20240305134041.137006-1-hch@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Switch drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters to set up the queue parameters in an on-stack queue_limits structure and apply the atomically. Remove various helpers that have become so trivial that they can be folded into drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig --- drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c | 119 ++++++++++++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c index 94ed2b3ea6361d..fbd92803dc1da4 100644 --- a/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c +++ b/drivers/block/drbd/drbd_nl.c @@ -1216,11 +1216,6 @@ static unsigned int drbd_max_peer_bio_size(struct drbd_device *device) return DRBD_MAX_BIO_SIZE; } -static void blk_queue_discard_granularity(struct request_queue *q, unsigned int granularity) -{ - q->limits.discard_granularity = granularity; -} - static unsigned int drbd_max_discard_sectors(struct drbd_connection *connection) { /* when we introduced REQ_WRITE_SAME support, we also bumped @@ -1247,62 +1242,6 @@ static bool drbd_discard_supported(struct drbd_connection *connection, return true; } -static void decide_on_discard_support(struct drbd_device *device, - struct drbd_backing_dev *bdev) -{ - struct drbd_connection *connection = - first_peer_device(device)->connection; - struct request_queue *q = device->rq_queue; - unsigned int max_discard_sectors; - - if (!drbd_discard_supported(connection, bdev)) - goto not_supported; - - /* - * We don't care for the granularity, really. - * - * Stacking limits below should fix it for the local device. Whether or - * not it is a suitable granularity on the remote device is not our - * problem, really. If you care, you need to use devices with similar - * topology on all peers. - */ - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 512); - max_discard_sectors = drbd_max_discard_sectors(connection); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, max_discard_sectors); - return; - -not_supported: - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 0); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, 0); -} - -static void fixup_write_zeroes(struct drbd_device *device, struct request_queue *q) -{ - /* Fixup max_write_zeroes_sectors after blk_stack_limits(): - * if we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, - * we want to do that, even if our backend does not announce - * max_write_zeroes_sectors itself. */ - struct drbd_connection *connection = first_peer_device(device)->connection; - /* If the peer announces WZEROES support, use it. Otherwise, rather - * send explicit zeroes than rely on some discard-zeroes-data magic. */ - if (connection->agreed_features & DRBD_FF_WZEROES) - q->limits.max_write_zeroes_sectors = DRBD_MAX_BBIO_SECTORS; - else - q->limits.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0; -} - -static void fixup_discard_support(struct drbd_device *device, struct request_queue *q) -{ - unsigned int max_discard = device->rq_queue->limits.max_discard_sectors; - unsigned int discard_granularity = - device->rq_queue->limits.discard_granularity >> SECTOR_SHIFT; - - if (discard_granularity > max_discard) { - blk_queue_discard_granularity(q, 0); - blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, 0); - } -} - /* This is the workaround for "bio would need to, but cannot, be split" */ static unsigned int drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(struct drbd_device *device) { @@ -1320,8 +1259,11 @@ static unsigned int drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(struct drbd_device *device) void drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters(struct drbd_device *device, struct drbd_backing_dev *bdev, struct o_qlim *o) { + struct drbd_connection *connection = + first_peer_device(device)->connection; struct request_queue * const q = device->rq_queue; unsigned int now = queue_max_hw_sectors(q) << 9; + struct queue_limits lim; struct request_queue *b = NULL; unsigned int new; @@ -1348,24 +1290,55 @@ void drbd_reconsider_queue_parameters(struct drbd_device *device, drbd_info(device, "max BIO size = %u\n", new); } + lim = queue_limits_start_update(q); if (bdev) { - blk_set_stacking_limits(&q->limits); - blk_queue_max_segments(q, - drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(device)); + blk_set_stacking_limits(&lim); + lim.max_segments = drbd_backing_dev_max_segments(device); } else { - blk_queue_max_segments(q, BLK_MAX_SEGMENTS); + lim.max_segments = BLK_MAX_SEGMENTS; } - blk_queue_max_hw_sectors(q, new >> SECTOR_SHIFT); - blk_queue_segment_boundary(q, PAGE_SIZE - 1); - decide_on_discard_support(device, bdev); + lim.max_hw_sectors = new >> SECTOR_SHIFT; + lim.seg_boundary_mask = PAGE_SIZE - 1; - if (bdev) { - blk_stack_limits(&q->limits, &b->limits, 0); - disk_update_readahead(device->vdisk); + /* + * We don't care for the granularity, really. + * + * Stacking limits below should fix it for the local device. Whether or + * not it is a suitable granularity on the remote device is not our + * problem, really. If you care, you need to use devices with similar + * topology on all peers. + */ + if (drbd_discard_supported(connection, bdev)) { + lim.discard_granularity = 512; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = + drbd_max_discard_sectors(connection); + } else { + lim.discard_granularity = 0; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0; } - fixup_write_zeroes(device, q); - fixup_discard_support(device, q); + + if (bdev) + blk_stack_limits(&lim, &b->limits, 0); + + /* + * If we can handle "zeroes" efficiently on the protocol, we want to do + * that, even if our backend does not announce max_write_zeroes_sectors + * itself. + */ + if (connection->agreed_features & DRBD_FF_WZEROES) + lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = DRBD_MAX_BBIO_SECTORS; + else + lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0; + + if ((lim.discard_granularity >> SECTOR_SHIFT) > + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors) { + lim.discard_granularity = 0; + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0; + } + + if (queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim)) + drbd_err(device, "setting new queue limits failed\n"); } /* Starts the worker thread */