Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-blk: add DISCARD support to virtio-blk driver

[Liu, Changpeng]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Hajnoczi [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 4:20 AM
> To: Liu, Changpeng <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden; linux-
> address@hidden; address@hidden; address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-blk: add DISCARD support to virtio-blk driver
> 
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 04:39:25PM +0800, Changpeng Liu wrote:
> > Currently virtio-blk driver does not provide discard feature flag, so the
> > filesystems which built on top of the block device will not send discard
> > command. This is okay for HDD backend, but it will impact the performance
> > for SSD backend.
> >
> > Add a feature flag VIRTIO_BLK_F_DISCARD and command
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_DISCARD
> > to extend exist virtio-blk protocol. virtio-blk protocol uses a single
> > 8 bytes descriptor containing type,reserved and sector, currently Linux
> > uses the reserved field as IO priority, here we also re-use the reserved
> > field as number of discard sectors.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Changpeng Liu <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  drivers/block/virtio_blk.c      | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> >  include/uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h | 12 ++++++++++--
> >  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > index 1d4c9f8..550cfe7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/virtio_blk.c
> > @@ -241,6 +241,9 @@ static int virtio_queue_rq(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
> >     case REQ_OP_FLUSH:
> >             type = VIRTIO_BLK_T_FLUSH;
> >             break;
> > +   case REQ_OP_DISCARD:
> > +           type = VIRTIO_BLK_T_DISCARD;
> > +           break;
> >     case REQ_OP_SCSI_IN:
> >     case REQ_OP_SCSI_OUT:
> >             type = VIRTIO_BLK_T_SCSI_CMD;
> > @@ -256,16 +259,24 @@ static int virtio_queue_rq(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
> >     vbr->out_hdr.type = cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev, type);
> >     vbr->out_hdr.sector = type ?
> >             0 : cpu_to_virtio64(vblk->vdev, blk_rq_pos(req));
> > -   vbr->out_hdr.ioprio = cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev, req_get_ioprio(req));
> > +   vbr->out_hdr.u.ioprio = cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev, 
> > req_get_ioprio(req));
> >
> >     blk_mq_start_request(req);
> >
> > -   num = blk_rq_map_sg(hctx->queue, req, vbr->sg);
> > -   if (num) {
> > -           if (rq_data_dir(req) == WRITE)
> > -                   vbr->out_hdr.type |= cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev,
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_OUT);
> > -           else
> > -                   vbr->out_hdr.type |= cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev,
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_IN);
> > +   if (type == VIRTIO_BLK_T_DISCARD) {
> > +           vbr->out_hdr.u.discard_nr_sectors = cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev,
> > +
> blk_rq_sectors(req));
> > +           num = 0;
> > +   } else {
> > +           num = blk_rq_map_sg(hctx->queue, req, vbr->sg);
> > +           if (num) {
> > +                   if (rq_data_dir(req) == WRITE)
> > +                           vbr->out_hdr.type |= cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev,
> > +
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_OUT);
> > +                   else
> > +                           vbr->out_hdr.type |= cpu_to_virtio32(vblk->vdev,
> > +
> VIRTIO_BLK_T_IN);
> > +           }
> >     }
> >
> >     spin_lock_irqsave(&vblk->vqs[qid].lock, flags);
> > @@ -775,6 +786,15 @@ static int virtblk_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> >     if (!err && opt_io_size)
> >             blk_queue_io_opt(q, blk_size * opt_io_size);
> >
> > +   if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_BLK_F_DISCARD)) {
> > +           q->limits.discard_zeroes_data = 0;
> > +           q->limits.discard_alignment = blk_size;
> > +           q->limits.discard_granularity = blk_size;
> > +           blk_queue_max_discard_sectors(q, UINT_MAX);
> > +           blk_queue_max_discard_segments(q, 1);
> > +           queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_DISCARD, q);
> > +   }
> 
> Please add configuration space fields for these limits.  Looking at the
> virtio-scsi block limits code in QEMU's scsi_disk_emulate_inquiry() I
> can see that the hypervisor has useful values that it wants to
> communicate.  They shouldn't be hardcoded to blk_size.
Yes, move discard related parameters to configuration space make sense.
> 
> > +
> >     virtio_device_ready(vdev);
> >
> >     device_add_disk(&vdev->dev, vblk->disk);
> > @@ -882,14 +902,14 @@ static int virtblk_restore(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> >     VIRTIO_BLK_F_SCSI,
> >  #endif
> >     VIRTIO_BLK_F_FLUSH, VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY,
> VIRTIO_BLK_F_CONFIG_WCE,
> > -   VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > +   VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ, VIRTIO_BLK_F_DISCARD,
> >  }
> >  ;
> >  static unsigned int features[] = {
> >     VIRTIO_BLK_F_SEG_MAX, VIRTIO_BLK_F_SIZE_MAX,
> VIRTIO_BLK_F_GEOMETRY,
> >     VIRTIO_BLK_F_RO, VIRTIO_BLK_F_BLK_SIZE,
> >     VIRTIO_BLK_F_FLUSH, VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY,
> VIRTIO_BLK_F_CONFIG_WCE,
> > -   VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ,
> > +   VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ, VIRTIO_BLK_F_DISCARD,
> >  };
> >
> >  static struct virtio_driver virtio_blk = {
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h 
> > b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h
> > index 9ebe4d9..d608649 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/virtio_blk.h
> > @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
> >  #define VIRTIO_BLK_F_BLK_SIZE      6       /* Block size of disk is 
> > available*/
> >  #define VIRTIO_BLK_F_TOPOLOGY      10      /* Topology information is
> available */
> >  #define VIRTIO_BLK_F_MQ            12      /* support more than one vq */
> > +#define VIRTIO_BLK_F_DISCARD       13      /* DISCARD command is supported
> */
> >
> >  /* Legacy feature bits */
> >  #ifndef VIRTIO_BLK_NO_LEGACY
> > @@ -114,6 +115,9 @@ struct virtio_blk_config {
> >  /* Get device ID command */
> >  #define VIRTIO_BLK_T_GET_ID    8
> >
> > +/* Discard command */
> > +#define VIRTIO_BLK_T_DISCARD       16
> > +
> >  #ifndef VIRTIO_BLK_NO_LEGACY
> >  /* Barrier before this op. */
> >  #define VIRTIO_BLK_T_BARRIER       0x80000000
> > @@ -127,8 +131,12 @@ struct virtio_blk_config {
> >  struct virtio_blk_outhdr {
> >     /* VIRTIO_BLK_T* */
> >     __virtio32 type;
> > -   /* io priority. */
> > -   __virtio32 ioprio;
> > +   union {
> > +           /* io priority. */
> > +           __virtio32 ioprio;
> > +           /* discard number of sectors */
> > +           __virtio32 discard_nr_sectors;
> > +   } u;
> 
> DISCARD commands have no io priority?  Perhaps it's better to add an
> extended header.
What I think now is that, keep the ioprio field, and let DISCARD command has 
input data buffers, 16 bytes aligned descriptor for each
DISCARD segment(can support mult-range feature), and this is also aligned with 
SCSI and NVMe specification.