WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] blk[front|back] does not hand over disk parameters

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] blk[front|back] does not hand over disk parameters
From: Adi Kriegisch <adi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:54:58 +0100
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 03:55:47 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4D6B8D20020000780003409E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20110225164344.GW10906@xxxxxxxx> <1298887564.5034.584.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D6B8D20020000780003409E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:55:12AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.02.11 at 11:06, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[SNIP]
> > It should be trivial to add this in a compatible manner since the
> > frontend can just do what it does today if the nodes are missing and the
> > backend wouldn't rely on the frontend doing anything useful with the
> > information anyway.
> 
> Am I right in understanding that these numbers aren't used by
> the block layer itself at all, but just get provided to userspace for
> whatever optimization it can do? In that case, I can't really see
> how passing through these values can really help general
> performance (i.e. for apps not paying attention to these values).
AFAIK these values are used by mkfs.* in userspace and by the I/O Schedulers
in kernel space to optimize performance. There has been some discussions about
that on the kernel mailing lists[1] and there is an interesting document about
that available from Mike Snitzer[2].
Those values are important for 4K block size drives, for SSDs and -- as in my
case -- for RAID levels with checksums.
A quick test with a samba server installed in Dom0 revealed that those
values do not need to be honoured by Samba to get full write speed. I/O
scheduler seems to be the one that needs those values.

-- Adi

[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-ide&m=124058535512850&w=4
[2] http://people.redhat.com/msnitzer/docs/io-limits.txt

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel