On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:47 AM Pankaj Gupta
<pankaj.gupta.linux at gmail.com> wrote:>
> > >
> > > Enable asynchronous flush for virtio pmem using work queue. Also,
> > > coalesce the flush requests when a flush is already in process.
> > > This functionality is copied from md/RAID code.
> > >
> > > When a flush is already in process, new flush requests wait till
> > > previous flush completes in another context (work queue). For all
> > > the requests come between ongoing flush and new flush start time,
only
> > > single flush executes, thus adhers to flush coalscing logic. This
is
> >
> > s/adhers/adheres/
> >
> > s/coalscing/coalescing/
> >
> > > important for maintaining the flush request order with request
coalscing.
> >
> > s/coalscing/coalescing/
>
> o.k. Sorry for the spelling mistakes.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux at
gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c | 74
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> > > drivers/nvdimm/virtio_pmem.c | 10 +++++
> > > drivers/nvdimm/virtio_pmem.h | 16 ++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
b/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > index 10351d5b49fa..179ea7a73338 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/nvdimm/nd_virtio.c
> > > @@ -100,26 +100,66 @@ static int virtio_pmem_flush(struct
nd_region *nd_region)
> > > /* The asynchronous flush callback function */
> > > int async_pmem_flush(struct nd_region *nd_region, struct bio
*bio)
> > > {
> > > - /*
> > > - * Create child bio for asynchronous flush and chain with
> > > - * parent bio. Otherwise directly call nd_region flush.
> > > + /* queue asynchronous flush and coalesce the flush
requests */
> > > + struct virtio_device *vdev = nd_region->provider_data;
> > > + struct virtio_pmem *vpmem = vdev->priv;
> > > + ktime_t req_start = ktime_get_boottime();
> > > + int ret = -EINPROGRESS;
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock_irq(&vpmem->lock);
> >
> > Why a new lock and not continue to use ->pmem_lock?
>
> This spinlock is to protect entry in 'wait_event_lock_irq'
> and the Other spinlock is to protect virtio queue data.
Understood, but md shares the mddev->lock for both purposes, so I
would ask that you either document what motivates the locking split,
or just reuse the lock until a strong reason to split them arises.