From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@linux.intel.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>
Cc: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"keith.busch@intel.com" <keith.busch@intel.com>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"ming.lei@redhat.com" <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:15:07 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180522141507.GQ5528@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7a287827b4c00151bb7714deca7ea6453177504.camel@wdc.com>
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 11:29:06PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-05-21 at 17:11 -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > switch (ret) {
> > case BLK_EH_HANDLED:
> > - __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
> > - break;
> > - case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER:
> > /*
> > - * As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> > - * ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored
> > - * completions and further spurious timeouts.
> > + * If the request is still in flight, the driver is requesting
> > + * blk-mq complete it.
> > */
> > - blk_mq_rq_update_aborted_gstate(req, 0);
> > + if (blk_mq_rq_state(req) == MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT)
> > + __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
> > + break;
> > + case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER:
> > blk_add_timer(req);
> > break;
> > case BLK_EH_NOT_HANDLED:
> > @@ -880,64 +782,64 @@ static void blk_mq_rq_timed_out(struct request *req, bool reserved)
> > }
> > }
>
> I think the above changes can lead to concurrent calls of
> __blk_mq_complete_request() from the regular completion path and the timeout
> path. That's wrong: the __blk_mq_complete_request() caller should guarantee
> that no concurrent calls from another context to that function can occur.
Hi Bart,
This shouldn't be introducing any new concorrent calls to
__blk_mq_complete_request if they don't already exist. The timeout work
calls it only if the driver's timeout returns BLK_EH_HANDLED, which means
the driver is claiming the command is now done, but the driver didn't call
blk_mq_complete_request as indicated by the request's IN_FLIGHT state.
In order to get a second call to __blk_mq_complete_request(), then,
the driver would have to end up calling blk_mq_complete_request()
in another context. But there's nothing stopping that from happening
today, and would be bad if any driver actually did that: the request
may have been re-allocated and issued as a new command, and calling
blk_mq_complete_request() the second time introduces data corruption.
Thanks,
Keith
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: keith.busch@linux.intel.com (Keith Busch)
Subject: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 08:15:07 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180522141507.GQ5528@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7a287827b4c00151bb7714deca7ea6453177504.camel@wdc.com>
On Mon, May 21, 2018@11:29:06PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-05-21@17:11 -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > switch (ret) {
> > case BLK_EH_HANDLED:
> > - __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
> > - break;
> > - case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER:
> > /*
> > - * As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> > - * ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored
> > - * completions and further spurious timeouts.
> > + * If the request is still in flight, the driver is requesting
> > + * blk-mq complete it.
> > */
> > - blk_mq_rq_update_aborted_gstate(req, 0);
> > + if (blk_mq_rq_state(req) == MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT)
> > + __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
> > + break;
> > + case BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER:
> > blk_add_timer(req);
> > break;
> > case BLK_EH_NOT_HANDLED:
> > @@ -880,64 +782,64 @@ static void blk_mq_rq_timed_out(struct request *req, bool reserved)
> > }
> > }
>
> I think the above changes can lead to concurrent calls of
> __blk_mq_complete_request() from the regular completion path and the timeout
> path. That's wrong: the __blk_mq_complete_request() caller should guarantee
> that no concurrent calls from another context to that function can occur.
Hi Bart,
This shouldn't be introducing any new concorrent calls to
__blk_mq_complete_request if they don't already exist. The timeout work
calls it only if the driver's timeout returns BLK_EH_HANDLED, which means
the driver is claiming the command is now done, but the driver didn't call
blk_mq_complete_request as indicated by the request's IN_FLIGHT state.
In order to get a second call to __blk_mq_complete_request(), then,
the driver would have to end up calling blk_mq_complete_request()
in another context. But there's nothing stopping that from happening
today, and would be bad if any driver actually did that: the request
may have been re-allocated and issued as a new command, and calling
blk_mq_complete_request() the second time introduces data corruption.
Thanks,
Keith
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-22 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 128+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-21 23:11 [RFC PATCH 0/3] blk-mq: Timeout rework Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] blk-mq: Reference count request usage Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 2:27 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 2:27 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 15:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Fix timeout and state order Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 2:28 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 2:28 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 15:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 16:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 14:15 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2018-05-22 14:15 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:34 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:34 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:48 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 2:49 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 2:49 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 3:16 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 3:16 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 3:47 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 3:47 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 3:51 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 3:51 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 8:51 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 8:51 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:35 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 14:35 ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 14:20 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:20 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:37 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:37 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:46 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:46 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:57 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:57 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:01 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:01 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:07 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:07 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:17 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:17 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:23 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:23 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 16:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-23 0:34 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23 0:34 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23 14:35 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-23 14:35 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-24 1:52 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-24 1:52 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23 5:48 ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-05-23 5:48 ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-07-12 18:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 18:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 19:24 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-12 19:24 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-12 22:24 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 22:24 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 1:12 ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13 1:12 ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13 2:40 ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13 2:40 ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13 15:43 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 15:43 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 15:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 15:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 18:47 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 18:47 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 23:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 23:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 23:58 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 23:58 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 19:56 ` hch
2018-07-18 19:56 ` hch
2018-07-18 20:39 ` hch
2018-07-18 20:39 ` hch
2018-07-18 21:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 22:53 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 22:53 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:53 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:53 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 20:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:17 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:17 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:33 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:33 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 13:19 ` hch
2018-07-19 13:19 ` hch
2018-07-19 14:59 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 14:59 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 15:56 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 15:56 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:04 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-19 16:04 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-19 16:22 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:22 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:29 ` hch
2018-07-19 16:29 ` hch
2018-07-19 20:18 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 20:18 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 13:22 ` hch
2018-07-19 13:22 ` hch
2018-05-21 23:29 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] blk-mq: Timeout rework Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 14:06 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:06 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:30 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:44 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:44 ` Keith Busch
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=20180522141507.GQ5528@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
/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.