All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: Zoned storage and BLK_STS_RESOURCE
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:54:22 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3bc4b958-73ea-47d4-9b94-299db1f7ee3e@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba8caf98-8b09-4494-add8-31381b04cd33@acm.org>

On 2024/12/16 12:42, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> 
> On 12/16/24 12:23 PM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>> On 2024/12/16 11:24, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> If 'qd=1' is changed into 'qd=2' in tests/zbd/012 then this test fails
>>> against all kernel versions I tried, including kernel version 6.9. Do
>>> you agree that this test should pass? If you agree with this, do you
>>> agree that the only solution is to postpone error handling of zoned
>>> writes until all pending zoned writes have completed and only to
>>> resubmit failed writes after all pending writes have completed?
>>
>> Well, of course: if one write fails, the target zone write pointer will not
>> advance as it should have, so all writes for the same zone after the failed one
>> will be unaligned and fail. Is that what you are talking about ?
>>
>> With the fixes applied to rc3, the automatic error recovery in the block layer
>> is gone. So it is up to the user (FS, DM or application) to do the right thing.
> 
> Hi Damien,
> 
> For non-zoned storage the BLK_STS_RESOURCE status is not reported to the
> I/O submitter (filesystem). The BLK_STS_RESOURCE status causes the block
> layer to retry a request. For zoned storage if the block driver reports
> the BLK_STS_RESOURCE status and if QD > 1 then the submitter
> (filesystem) has to retry the I/O. Isn't that inconsistent? Solving this
> inconsistency is one reason why I would like to postpone handling of
> zoned write errors until all pending I/O has either completed or failed.

As I said, if one write does not work, whatever the reason, all other writes
behind it for the same zone will also not work. So yes, handling of errors in
the end needs to be done after all writes come back to the issuer. Nothing new
here. I do not see the issue. And I am not sure where you want to go with this.

> Another reason is that this behavior change is an essential step towards
> supporting write pipelining. If multiple zoned writes are outstanding,
> and the block driver postpones execution of any of these writes (unit
> attention, BLK_STS_RESOURCE, ...) then any zoned writes must only be
> resubmitted after all pending zoned writes have either completed or failed.

Yes. But I am still confused. Where is the problem ?

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2024-12-16 20:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-16 19:24 Zoned storage and BLK_STS_RESOURCE Bart Van Assche
2024-12-16 20:23 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-16 20:42   ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-16 20:54     ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2024-12-16 21:22       ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-16 22:49         ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 14:56         ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-19  5:55           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-19 17:07             ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-17  4:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-17 15:04   ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 18:38     ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-17 18:46     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 18:51       ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 19:07         ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 19:20           ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 19:25             ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-17 19:28               ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 19:33                 ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 19:37                   ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 19:41                     ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 19:48                       ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 19:54                         ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 19:58                           ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-17 20:59                             ` Damien Le Moal
2024-12-17 21:25                               ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-18  6:58                               ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-19 18:04                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-21  8:10                                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06 18:54                                     ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-19  6:00                       ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-19 14:50                         ` Jens Axboe
2024-12-19 17:12                         ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-19 23:10                           ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-06 20:14                             ` Bart Van Assche
2024-12-21  8:13                           ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-12-17 19:32             ` Jens Axboe

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=3bc4b958-73ea-47d4-9b94-299db1f7ee3e@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.