diff mbox

[06/16] mmc: core: replace waitqueue with worker

Message ID a3216031-0801-45e2-320c-bfc88fa742b4@kernel.dk (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Jens Axboe March 14, 2017, 2:36 p.m. UTC 
On 03/14/2017 06:59 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 13/03/17 16:19, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 03/13/2017 03:25 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>> On 11/03/17 00:05, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>> On 03/10/2017 07:21 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>>>>> Essentially I take out that thread and replace it with this one worker
>>>>>> introduced in this very patch. I agree the driver can block in many ways
>>>>>> and that is why I need to have it running in process context, and this
>>>>>> is what the worker introduced here provides.
>>>>>
>>>>> The last time I looked at the blk-mq I/O scheduler code, it pulled up to
>>>>> qdepth requests from the I/O scheduler and left them on a local list while
>>>>> running ->queue_rq().  That means blocking in ->queue_rq() leaves some
>>>>> number of requests in limbo (not issued but also not in the I/O scheduler)
>>>>> for that time.
>>>>
>>>> Look again, if we're not handling the requeued dispatches, we pull one
>>>> at the time from the scheduler.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's good :-)
>>>
>>> Now the next thing ;-)
>>>
>>> It looks like we either set BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING and miss the possibility of
>>> issuing synchronous requests immediately, or we don't set BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING
>>> in which case we are never allowed to sleep in ->queue_rq().  Is that true?
>>
>> Only one of those statements is true - if you don't set BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING,
>> then you may never block in your ->queue_rq() function. But if you do set it,
>> it does not preclude immediate issue of sync requests.
> 
> I meant it gets put to the workqueue rather than issued in the context of
> the submitter.

There's one case that doesn't look like it was converted properly, but
that's a mistake. The general insert-and-run cases run inline if we can,
but the direct-issue needs a fixup, see below.

Comments

Christoph Hellwig March 14, 2017, 2:43 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 08:36:26AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> There's one case that doesn't look like it was converted properly, but
> that's a mistake. The general insert-and-run cases run inline if we can,
> but the direct-issue needs a fixup, see below.

Note that blk_mq_try_issue_directly is only called for the multiple
hardware queue case, so MMC would not hit it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Jens Axboe March 14, 2017, 2:52 p.m. UTC | #2 
On 03/14/2017 08:43 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 08:36:26AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> There's one case that doesn't look like it was converted properly, but
>> that's a mistake. The general insert-and-run cases run inline if we can,
>> but the direct-issue needs a fixup, see below.
> 
> Note that blk_mq_try_issue_directly is only called for the multiple
> hardware queue case, so MMC would not hit it.

Right, which is why I said that the general case works fine, it's
only the explicit issue-direct that currently does not. Not by
design, just an error.
Linus Walleij March 28, 2017, 7:47 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:

> There's one case that doesn't look like it was converted properly, but
> that's a mistake. The general insert-and-run cases run inline if we can,
> but the direct-issue needs a fixup, see below.
>
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 159187a28d66..4196d6bee92d 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -1434,7 +1434,8 @@ static blk_qc_t request_to_qc_t(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq)
>         return blk_tag_to_qc_t(rq->internal_tag, hctx->queue_num, true);
>  }
>
> -static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie)
> +static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie,
> +                                     bool can_block)
>  {
>         struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
>         struct blk_mq_queue_data bd = {
> @@ -1475,7 +1476,7 @@ static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie)
>         }
>
>  insert:
> -       blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, false, true, true, false);
> +       blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, false, true, false, can_block);
>  }
>
>  /*
> @@ -1569,11 +1570,11 @@ static blk_qc_t blk_mq_make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
>
>                 if (!(data.hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING)) {
>                         rcu_read_lock();
> -                       blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie);
> +                       blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie, false);
>                         rcu_read_unlock();
>                 } else {
>                         srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&data.hctx->queue_rq_srcu);
> -                       blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie);
> +                       blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie, true);
>                         srcu_read_unlock(&data.hctx->queue_rq_srcu, srcu_idx);
>                 }
>                 goto done;

Jens do you have this in your patch queue or is it something you want
us to test and
submit back to you?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 159187a28d66..4196d6bee92d 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -1434,7 +1434,8 @@  static blk_qc_t request_to_qc_t(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq)
 	return blk_tag_to_qc_t(rq->internal_tag, hctx->queue_num, true);
 }
 
-static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie)
+static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie,
+				      bool can_block)
 {
 	struct request_queue *q = rq->q;
 	struct blk_mq_queue_data bd = {
@@ -1475,7 +1476,7 @@  static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct request *rq, blk_qc_t *cookie)
 	}
 
 insert:
-	blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, false, true, true, false);
+	blk_mq_sched_insert_request(rq, false, true, false, can_block);
 }
 
 /*
@@ -1569,11 +1570,11 @@  static blk_qc_t blk_mq_make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio)
 
 		if (!(data.hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING)) {
 			rcu_read_lock();
-			blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie);
+			blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie, false);
 			rcu_read_unlock();
 		} else {
 			srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&data.hctx->queue_rq_srcu);
-			blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie);
+			blk_mq_try_issue_directly(old_rq, &cookie, true);
 			srcu_read_unlock(&data.hctx->queue_rq_srcu, srcu_idx);
 		}
 		goto done;