From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752616Ab3GSVRY (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:17:24 -0400 Received: from mail.linux-iscsi.org ([67.23.28.174]:34073 "EHLO linux-iscsi.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751511Ab3GSVRW (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 17:17:22 -0400 Message-ID: <1374268967.7397.1075.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [ATTEND] scsi-mq prototype discussion From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" To: James Bottomley Cc: Jens Axboe , Hannes Reinecke , "ksummit-2013-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , James Smart , linux-scsi , LKML , "kmo@daterainc.com" , target-devel , Andrew Vasquez , Tejun Heo , Christoph Hellwig , "scameron@beardog.cce.hp.com" , Mike Christie Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 14:22:47 -0700 In-Reply-To: <1374036751.2045.20.camel@dabdike> References: <1373588612.7397.447.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> <20130712010223.GA15673@kroah.com> <1373592815.7397.477.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> <51DFDFF5.80702@suse.de> <1373698410.2922.10.camel@dabdike> <1374008849.7397.853.camel@haakon3.risingtidesystems.com> <20130716211529.GQ22392@kernel.dk> <1374036751.2045.20.camel@dabdike> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2013-07-17 at 04:52 +0000, James Bottomley wrote: > On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 15:15 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16 2013, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote: > > > On Sat, 2013-07-13 at 06:53 +0000, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > Lets start with discussing this on the list, please, and then see where > > > > we go from there ... > > > > > > > > > > Yes, the discussion is beginning to make it's way to the list. I've > > > mostly been waiting for blk-mq to get a wider review before taking the > > > early scsi-mq prototype driver to a larger public audience. > > > > > > Primarily, I'm now reaching out to the people most effected by existing > > > scsi_request_fn() based performance limitations. Most of them have > > > abandoned existing scsi_request_fn() based logic in favor of raw block > > > make_request() based drivers, and are now estimating the amount of > > > effort to move to an scsi-mq based approach. > > > > > > Regardless, as the prototype progresses over the next months, having a > > > face-to-face discussion with the key parties in the room would be very > > > helpful given the large amount of effort involved to actually make this > > > type of generational shift in SCSI actually happen. > > > > There's a certain amount of overlap with the aio/O_DIRECT work as well. > > But if it's not a general session, could always be a BOF or something. > > > > I'll second the argument that most technical topics probably DO belong > > in a topic related workshop. But that leaves us with basically only > > process related topics at KS, I don't think it hurts to have a bit of > > tech meat on the bone too. At least I personally miss that part of KS > > from years gone by. > > Heh well, given that most of the block mq discussions at LSF have been > you saying you really should get around to cleaning up and posting the > code, you'll understand my wanting to see that happen first ... > > I suppose we could try to run a storage workshop within KS, but I think > most of the mini summit slots have already gone. That would be great, given there is a reasonable level of interest from various parities, and the pain threshold for existing scsi small block random I/O performance is high.. When will we know if there is a workshop / mini summit slot available..? (CC'ing Mike Christie as well for open-iscsi/scsi-mq bits) > There's also plumbers > if all slots are gone (I would say that, being biased and on the > programme committee) Ric is running the storage and Filesystems MC > > http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2013/ocw/events/LPC2013/tracks/159 FYI, I'm not trying to 'sell' scsi-mq to the larger community yet, but rather interested in getting the right scsi/block/LLD people in the same room at KS for an hour or two to discuss implementation details, given the scope of the effort involved. --nab