All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [patch] blk-flush: fix flush policy calculation
@ 2011-08-01 20:32 Jeff Moyer
  2011-08-02  1:20 ` Shaohua Li
  2011-08-04 10:16 ` Tejun Heo
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Moyer @ 2011-08-01 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Tejun Heo, Jens Axboe

Hi,

Reading through the code in blk-flush.c, it appears that there is an
oversight in the policy returned from blk_flush_policy:

        if (fflags & REQ_FLUSH) {
                if (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH)
                        policy |= REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH;
                if (blk_rq_sectors(rq))
                        policy |= REQ_FSEQ_DATA;
                if (!(fflags & REQ_FUA) && (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FUA))
                        policy |= REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH;
        }
        return policy;

This means that REQ_FSEQ_DATA can only be set if the queue flush_flags
include FLUSH and/or FUA.  However, the short-circuit for not issuing
flushes when the device doesn't need/support them depends on
REQ_FSEQ_DATA being set while the other two bits are clear:

        /*
         * If there's data but flush is not necessary, the request can be
         * processed directly without going through flush machinery.  Queue
         * for normal execution.
         */
        if ((policy & REQ_FSEQ_DATA) &&
            !(policy & (REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH))) {
                list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, &q->queue_head);
                return;
        }

Given the code as it stands, I don't think the body of this if statement
will ever be executed.  I've attached a fix for this below.  It seems
like this could be both a performance and a correctness issue, though
I've not run into any problems I can directly attribute to this (perhaps
due to file systems not issuing flushes when support is not advertised?).

Comments are appreciated.

Cheers,
Jeff

Signed-off-by: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>

diff --git a/block/blk-flush.c b/block/blk-flush.c
index bb21e4c..3a06118 100644
--- a/block/blk-flush.c
+++ b/block/blk-flush.c
@@ -95,11 +95,11 @@ static unsigned int blk_flush_policy(unsigned int fflags, struct request *rq)
 {
 	unsigned int policy = 0;
 
+	if (blk_rq_sectors(rq))
+		policy |= REQ_FSEQ_DATA;
 	if (fflags & REQ_FLUSH) {
 		if (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FLUSH)
 			policy |= REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH;
-		if (blk_rq_sectors(rq))
-			policy |= REQ_FSEQ_DATA;
 		if (!(fflags & REQ_FUA) && (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_FUA))
 			policy |= REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH;
 	}

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-08-09 17:29 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-08-01 20:32 [patch] blk-flush: fix flush policy calculation Jeff Moyer
2011-08-02  1:20 ` Shaohua Li
2011-08-02 15:28   ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-02 17:39   ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-02 18:17     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-08-02 18:31       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-02 18:41         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-08-02 19:46           ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-03  1:19             ` Shaohua Li
2011-08-09 17:13             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-08-09 17:29               ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-02 18:40       ` Mike Snitzer
2011-08-04 10:20     ` Tejun Heo
2011-08-08 17:31       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-08 17:31       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-08-04 10:16 ` Tejun Heo

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.