From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: stern@rowland.harvard.edu, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problems with the block-layer timeouts
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 08:23:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081106072352.GR21867@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081106090117U.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
On Thu, Nov 06 2008, FUJITA Tomonori wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 09:52:48 +0100
> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > > In blk_del_timer(), there's no reason to test q->rq_timed_out_fn. If
> > > the method pointer is NULL then req->deadline would be 0 anyway. In
> > > addition, req->deadline should be set to 0 and the end of the routine,
> > > just in case req gets requeued.
> > >
> > > In blk_add_timer(), the line
> > >
> > > expiry = round_jiffies(req->deadline);
> > >
> > > is not optimal. round_jiffies() will sometimes round a value _down_ to
> > > the nearest second. But blk_rq_timed_out_timer() tests whether
> > > req->deadline is in the past -- and if the deadline was rounded down
> > > then this won't be true the first time through. You wind up getting an
> > > unnecessary timer interrupt. Instead there should be a
> > > round_jiffies_up() utility routine, and it should be used in both
> > > blk_add_timer() and blk_rq_timed_out_timer().
> >
> > Very good point, we do indeed want a round_jiffies_up() for this!
>
> Just out of curiosity, why do we need to use round_jiffies here? We
> didn't do that for SCSI, right?
We don't have to, but given that we don't care about exact timeouts, we
may as well. It's not a new thing, we've done that since pretty much the
beginning of the generic timeout development.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-06 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-01 16:54 Problems with the block-layer timeouts Alan Stern
2008-11-02 20:35 ` Mike Anderson
2008-11-03 8:52 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 14:18 ` James Smart
2008-11-03 17:23 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 15:59 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 16:39 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-03 17:07 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 17:27 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-04 3:01 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-06 0:01 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-06 7:23 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2008-11-07 4:05 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-07 11:24 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 6:54 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-11 17:11 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 17:11 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 19:19 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-12 2:08 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-13 10:34 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-17 3:48 ` FUJITA Tomonori
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081106072352.GR21867@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.