All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	Martin Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 0/3] scsi timeout handling updates
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:20:34 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181129172034.GD8332@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181129171159.GA28238@lst.de>

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 06:11:59PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> > index a82830f39933..d0ef540711c7 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> > @@ -647,7 +647,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_mq_complete_request);
> >  
> >  int blk_mq_request_started(struct request *rq)
> >  {
> > -	return blk_mq_rq_state(rq) != MQ_RQ_IDLE;
> > +	return blk_mq_rq_state(rq) == MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT;
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_mq_request_started);
> 
> Independ of this series this change looks like the right thing to do.
> But this whole area is a mine field, so separate testing would be
> very helpful.
>
> I also wonder why we even bother with the above helper, a direct
> state comparism seems a lot more obvious to the reader.

I think it's just because blk_mq_rq_state() is a private interface. The
enum mq_rq_state is defined under include/linux/, so it looks okay to
make getting the state public too.
 
> Last but not least the blk_mq_request_started check in nbd
> should probably be lifted into blk_mq_tag_to_rq while we're at it..
> 
> As for the nvme issue - it seems to me like we need to decouple the
> nvme loop frontend request from the target backend request.  In case
> of a timeout/reset we'll complete struct request like all other nvme
> transport drivers, but we leave the backend target state around, which
> will be freed when it completes (or leaks when the completion is lost).

I don't think nvme's loop target should do anything to help a command
complete. It shouldn't even implement a timeout for the same reason
no stacking block driver implements these. If a request is stuck, the
lowest level is the only driver that should have the responsibility to
make it unstuck.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-29 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-26 16:54 [PATCHv4 0/3] scsi timeout handling updates Keith Busch
2018-11-26 16:54 ` [PATCHv4 1/3] blk-mq: Return true if request was completed Keith Busch
2018-11-26 17:00   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-26 16:54 ` [PATCHv4 2/3] scsi: Do not rely on blk-mq for double completions Keith Busch
2018-11-26 17:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-26 16:54 ` [PATCHv4 3/3] blk-mq: Simplify request completion state Keith Busch
2018-11-26 17:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-26 17:33 ` [PATCHv4 0/3] scsi timeout handling updates Jens Axboe
2018-11-28  2:20   ` Ming Lei
2018-11-28  7:00     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-28 10:07       ` Ming Lei
2018-11-28 10:08         ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-28 15:49           ` Keith Busch
2018-11-28 15:58             ` Jens Axboe
2018-11-28 16:26               ` Keith Busch
2018-11-28 16:31                 ` Jens Axboe
2018-11-28 17:56                 ` Keith Busch
2018-11-29  1:18                   ` Ming Lei
2018-11-28 22:31                 ` Keith Busch
2018-11-28 23:36                   ` Keith Busch
2018-11-29 17:11                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-11-29 17:20                       ` Keith Busch [this message]
2018-12-28 12:47                         ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-11-29  2:15           ` Ming Lei
2018-11-29  2:39             ` Martin K. Petersen
2018-11-29  8:12               ` Ming Lei

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=20181129172034.GD8332@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --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.