| Message ID | CACVXFVMPAdFbX3x-KUjHCQhb_rT6p9ROYHg63aUtEqdbitEaKQ@mail.gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
Hi Ming On 06/15/2018 11:20 AM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:04 AM, jianchao.wang > <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> wrote: >> Hi Ming >> >> Thanks for your kindly response. >> >> On 06/15/2018 10:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>>>> IMO, ref-counter is just to fix the blk-mq req life recycle issue. >>>>> It cannot replace the blk_mark_rq_complete which could avoid the race between >>>>> timeout and io completion path. >>>> The .timeout return BLK_EH_DONE doesn't always mean the request has been completed. >>>> Such as scsi-mid layer, its .timeout callback return BLK_EH_DONE but the timed out >>>> request is still in abort or eh process. What if a completion irq come during that ? >>> For blk-mq, it is avoided by the atomic state change in >>> __blk_mq_complete_request(), >>> that is why I mentioned the question in my last reply. >>> >> >> but blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do that. >> do I miss anything ? > > Right, that is the difference between blk-mq and legacy now, Sorry, I cannot follow your point. blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do a atmoc state change from IN-FLIGHT to COMPLETE. __blk_mq_complete_request could still proceed to complete a timed out request which is in scsi abort or eh process. Is it really OK ? Thanks Jianchao > then if scsi-mq > drivers can work well, they should work well with the following change in the > non-mq mode: > > diff --git a/block/blk-timeout.c b/block/blk-timeout.c > index 4b8a48d48ba1..9fce09d55652 100644 > --- a/block/blk-timeout.c > +++ b/block/blk-timeout.c > @@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ static void blk_rq_timed_out(struct request *req) > switch (ret) { > case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER: > blk_add_timer(req); > - blk_clear_rq_complete(req); > break; > case BLK_EH_DONE: > /* > @@ -115,8 +114,7 @@ static void blk_rq_check_expired(struct request > *rq, unsigned long *next_timeout > /* > * Check if we raced with end io completion > */ > - if (!blk_mark_rq_complete(rq)) > - blk_rq_timed_out(rq); > + blk_rq_timed_out(rq); > } else if (!*next_set || time_after(*next_timeout, deadline)) { > *next_timeout = deadline; > *next_set = 1; > > > Thanks, > Ming Lei >
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:26 AM, jianchao.wang <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi Ming > > On 06/15/2018 11:20 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:04 AM, jianchao.wang >> <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> wrote: >>> Hi Ming >>> >>> Thanks for your kindly response. >>> >>> On 06/15/2018 10:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>>>>> IMO, ref-counter is just to fix the blk-mq req life recycle issue. >>>>>> It cannot replace the blk_mark_rq_complete which could avoid the race between >>>>>> timeout and io completion path. >>>>> The .timeout return BLK_EH_DONE doesn't always mean the request has been completed. >>>>> Such as scsi-mid layer, its .timeout callback return BLK_EH_DONE but the timed out >>>>> request is still in abort or eh process. What if a completion irq come during that ? >>>> For blk-mq, it is avoided by the atomic state change in >>>> __blk_mq_complete_request(), >>>> that is why I mentioned the question in my last reply. >>>> >>> >>> but blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do that. >>> do I miss anything ? >> >> Right, that is the difference between blk-mq and legacy now, > > Sorry, I cannot follow your point. > blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do a atmoc state change from IN-FLIGHT to COMPLETE. > __blk_mq_complete_request could still proceed to complete a timed out request > which is in scsi abort or eh process. Is it really OK ? That is the idea of Christoph's patchset of 'complete requests from ->timeout', then drivers need to cover race between timeout and normal completeion. But at least the request won't be completed twice because of the atomic state change in __blk_mq_complete_request(). So what is your real concern about blk-mq's timeout? Thanks, Ming
Hi Ming Thanks for your kindly response On 06/15/2018 12:03 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:26 AM, jianchao.wang > <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> wrote: >> Hi Ming >> >> On 06/15/2018 11:20 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:04 AM, jianchao.wang >>> <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Ming >>>> >>>> Thanks for your kindly response. >>>> >>>> On 06/15/2018 10:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote: >>>>>>> IMO, ref-counter is just to fix the blk-mq req life recycle issue. >>>>>>> It cannot replace the blk_mark_rq_complete which could avoid the race between >>>>>>> timeout and io completion path. >>>>>> The .timeout return BLK_EH_DONE doesn't always mean the request has been completed. >>>>>> Such as scsi-mid layer, its .timeout callback return BLK_EH_DONE but the timed out >>>>>> request is still in abort or eh process. What if a completion irq come during that ? >>>>> For blk-mq, it is avoided by the atomic state change in >>>>> __blk_mq_complete_request(), >>>>> that is why I mentioned the question in my last reply. >>>>> >>>> >>>> but blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do that. >>>> do I miss anything ? >>> >>> Right, that is the difference between blk-mq and legacy now, >> >> Sorry, I cannot follow your point. >> blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do a atmoc state change from IN-FLIGHT to COMPLETE. >> __blk_mq_complete_request could still proceed to complete a timed out request >> which is in scsi abort or eh process. Is it really OK ? > > That is the idea of Christoph's patchset of 'complete requests from ->timeout', Yes, I used to read that mail thread. > then drivers need to cover race between timeout and normal completeion. > > But at least the request won't be completed twice because of the atomic > state change in __blk_mq_complete_request(). Yes > > So what is your real concern about blk-mq's timeout? I concern whether the current drivers have bee ready for taking this task currently. At least, for scsi, if I try to trigger timeout and completion path concurrently, system would crash. 4.17.rc7 or 4.18 with a patch that change state in blk_mq_check_expired will survive. Thanks jianchao > > Thanks, > Ming >
On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:20:40AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > but blk_mq_check_expired doesn't do that. > > do I miss anything ? > > Right, that is the difference between blk-mq and legacy now, then if scsi-mq > drivers can work well, they should work well with the following change in the > non-mq mode: We'll still need referene counting against reuse and/or premature freeing of requests.
diff --git a/block/blk-timeout.c b/block/blk-timeout.c index 4b8a48d48ba1..9fce09d55652 100644 --- a/block/blk-timeout.c +++ b/block/blk-timeout.c @@ -88,7 +88,6 @@ static void blk_rq_timed_out(struct request *req) switch (ret) { case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER: blk_add_timer(req); - blk_clear_rq_complete(req); break; case BLK_EH_DONE: /* @@ -115,8 +114,7 @@ static void blk_rq_check_expired(struct request *rq, unsigned long *next_timeout /* * Check if we raced with end io completion */ - if (!blk_mark_rq_complete(rq)) - blk_rq_timed_out(rq); + blk_rq_timed_out(rq); } else if (!*next_set || time_after(*next_timeout, deadline)) { *next_timeout = deadline;