d/freebsd-nq
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
f6837d9b53
freebsd-nq/config/kernel-blk-queue-flush.m4

86 lines
2.3 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
dnl #
dnl # 2.6.36 API change
dnl # In 2.6.36 kernels the blk_queue_ordered() interface has been
dnl # replaced by the simpler blk_queue_flush(). However, while the
dnl # old interface was available to all the new one is GPL-only.
dnl # Thus in addition to detecting if this function is available
dnl # we determine if it is GPL-only. If the GPL-only interface is
dnl # there we implement our own compatibility function, otherwise
dnl # we use the function. The hope is that long term this function
dnl # will be opened up.
dnl #
AC_DEFUN([ZFS_AC_KERNEL_BLK_QUEUE_FLUSH], [
AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether blk_queue_flush() is available])
tmp_flags="$EXTRA_KCFLAGS"
Only use gcc -Wunused-but-set-variable when available Certain versions of gcc generate an 'unrecognized command line option' error message when -Wunused-but-set-variable is used unconditionally. This in turn can cause several of the autoconf tests to misdetect an interface. Now, the use of -Wunused-but-set-variable in the autoconf tests was introduced by commit b9c59ec8 to address a gcc 4.6 compatibility problem. So we really only need to pass this option for version of gcc which are known to support it. Therefore, the tests have been updated to use the result of the existing ZFS_AC_CONFIG_ALWAYS_NO_UNUSED_BUT_SET_VARIABLE which determines if gcc supports this option. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Closes #1004
2013-01-11 00:09:31 +00:00
EXTRA_KCFLAGS="${NO_UNUSED_BUT_SET_VARIABLE}"
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
ZFS_LINUX_TRY_COMPILE([
#include <linux/blkdev.h>
],[
struct request_queue *q = NULL;
(void) blk_queue_flush(q, REQ_FLUSH);
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_BLK_QUEUE_FLUSH, 1,
[blk_queue_flush() is available])
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether blk_queue_flush() is GPL-only])
ZFS_LINUX_TRY_COMPILE([
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/blkdev.h>
MODULE_LICENSE("$ZFS_META_LICENSE");
],[
struct request_queue *q = NULL;
(void) blk_queue_flush(q, REQ_FLUSH);
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(no)
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_BLK_QUEUE_FLUSH_GPL_ONLY, 1,
[blk_queue_flush() is GPL-only])
])
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(no)
])
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
dnl #
dnl # 4.7 API change
dnl # Replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache
dnl #
AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether blk_queue_write_cache() exists])
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
ZFS_LINUX_TRY_COMPILE([
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
#include <linux/kernel.h>
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
#include <linux/blkdev.h>
],[
struct request_queue *q = NULL;
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
blk_queue_write_cache(q, true, true);
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_BLK_QUEUE_WRITE_CACHE, 1,
[blk_queue_write_cache() exists])
AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether blk_queue_write_cache() is GPL-only])
ZFS_LINUX_TRY_COMPILE([
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/blkdev.h>
MODULE_LICENSE("$ZFS_META_LICENSE");
],[
struct request_queue *q = NULL;
blk_queue_write_cache(q, true, true);
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(no)
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(yes)
AC_DEFINE(HAVE_BLK_QUEUE_WRITE_CACHE_GPL_ONLY, 1,
[blk_queue_write_cache() is GPL-only])
])
],[
AC_MSG_RESULT(no)
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
])
Linux 4.7 compat: replace blk_queue_flush with blk_queue_write_cache Signed-off-by: Chunwei Chen <david.chen@osnexus.com> Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Issue #4665
2016-05-18 20:45:39 +00:00
Fix synchronicity for ZVOLs. zvol_write() assumes that the write request must be written to stable storage if rq_is_sync() is true. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. Indeed, "sync" does *not* mean what we think it means in the context of the Linux block layer. This is well explained in linux/fs.h: WRITE: A normal async write. Device will be plugged. WRITE_SYNC: Synchronous write. Identical to WRITE, but passes down the hint that someone will be waiting on this IO shortly. WRITE_FLUSH: Like WRITE_SYNC but with preceding cache flush. WRITE_FUA: Like WRITE_SYNC but data is guaranteed to be on non-volatile media on completion. In other words, SYNC does not *mean* that the write must be on stable storage on completion. It just means that someone is waiting on us to complete the write request. Thus triggering a ZIL commit for each SYNC write request on a ZVOL is unnecessary and harmful for performance. To make matters worse, ZVOL users have no way to express that they actually want data to be written to stable storage, which means the ZIL is broken for ZVOLs. The request for stable storage is expressed by the FUA flag, so we must commit the ZIL after the write if the FUA flag is set. In addition, we must commit the ZIL before the write if the FLUSH flag is set. Also, we must inform the block layer that we actually support FLUSH and FUA. Signed-off-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
2011-09-05 09:11:38 +00:00
EXTRA_KCFLAGS="$tmp_flags"
])
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink