Re: [PATCH -next v2 2/5] block, bfq: add fake weight_counter for weight-raised queue

From: Jan Kara
Date: Mon Apr 25 2022 - 12:17:03 EST


Hello!

On Mon 25-04-22 21:34:16, yukuai (C) wrote:
> 在 2022/04/25 17:48, Jan Kara 写道:
> > On Sat 16-04-22 17:37:50, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > > Weight-raised queue is not inserted to weights_tree, which makes it
> > > impossible to track how many queues have pending requests through
> > > weights_tree insertion and removel. This patch add fake weight_counter
> > > for weight-raised queue to do that.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This is a bit hacky. I was looking into a better place where to hook to
> > count entities in a bfq_group with requests and I think bfq_add_bfqq_busy()
> > and bfq_del_bfqq_busy() are ideal for this. It also makes better sense
> > conceptually than hooking into weights tree handling.
>
> bfq_del_bfqq_busy() will be called when all the reqs in the bfqq are
> dispatched, however there might still some reqs are't completed yet.
>
> Here what we want to track is how many bfqqs have pending reqs,
> specifically if the bfqq have reqs are't complted.
>
> Thus I think bfq_del_bfqq_busy() is not the right place to do that.

Yes, I'm aware there will be a difference. But note that bfqq can stay busy
with only dispatched requests because the logic in __bfq_bfqq_expire() will
not call bfq_del_bfqq_busy() if idling is needed for service guarantees. So
I think using bfq_add/del_bfqq_busy() would work OK.

Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR