From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: blk request timeout handler against 2.6.26 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:37:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20080620083738.GX20851@kernel.dk> References: <20080503020000.GU14976@parisc-linux.org> <20080507074357.GP329@kernel.dk> <20080513032012.GC9511@us.ibm.com> <20080619171741.GB819@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([87.55.233.238]:17865 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751192AbYFTIhl (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 04:37:41 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080619171741.GB819@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Anderson Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 19 2008, Mike Anderson wrote: > Jens, > > What is the status of the blk request timeout handler patches? I noticed > the branch is showing no update for 7 months and the updates sent to the > list received no response. > > I was working on a abort function patch on top of the timeout patches to > see if I could speed up some multipath failure over cases and wanted to > understand if the blk timeout patch set was still a valid patch set. It's still alive, I'll update the branch with the latest stuff. Perhaps we can even make 2.6.27, it should be about ready-cooked now. > > > malahal@us.ibm.com wrote: > > Add missing queue lock in blk_complete_request(). Ran disktest for few > > hours and it works fine with this patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Malahal Naineni > > > > diff -r c06b3eb1f516 block/blk-core.c > > --- a/block/blk-core.c Wed May 07 20:07:12 2008 -0700 > > +++ b/block/blk-core.c Wed May 07 20:17:03 2008 -0700 > > @@ -1856,6 +1856,10 @@ > > */ > > void blk_complete_request(struct request *req) > > { > > + unsigned long flags; > > + struct request_queue *q = req->q; > > + int rc; > > + > > /* > > * We don't have to worry about this one timing out any more. > > * If we are unable to remove the timer, then the command > > @@ -1864,7 +1868,10 @@ > > * that function could really be. It might be on another processor, > > * etc, etc. > > */ > > - if (!blk_delete_timer(req)) > > + spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags); > > + rc = blk_delete_timer(req); > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags); > > + if (!rc) > > return; > > > > __blk_complete_request(req); > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -andmike > -- > Michael Anderson > andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com -- Jens Axboe