From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: axboe@fb.com (Jens Axboe) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:34:20 -0600 Subject: [PATCH, RFC] blk-mq: use a delayed work item for timeouts In-Reply-To: <1444678154-24766-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> References: <1444678154-24766-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> Message-ID: <561C0B3C.70004@fb.com> On 10/12/2015 01:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > For some pending NVMe work I'd really love to be able to get my timeouts > from process context. So far it seems only SCSI and NVMe use the blk-mq > timeout handler, and both don't seem to be particularly excited about > being called from time context. Does anyone have an objection against > the patch below that switches it to use a delayed work item? I could > make use of this quickly for NVMe, but for SCSI we still have to deal > with the old request code which can't be switched to a delayed work > as easily. No that's definitely fine with me, imho most error handling callbacks should be in process context for ease of use in the driver. -- Jens Axboe From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] blk-mq: use a delayed work item for timeouts Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:34:20 -0600 Message-ID: <561C0B3C.70004@fb.com> References: <1444678154-24766-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.153.30]:1226 "EHLO mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751116AbbJLTet (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:34:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1444678154-24766-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: hare@suse.de, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org On 10/12/2015 01:29 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > For some pending NVMe work I'd really love to be able to get my timeouts > from process context. So far it seems only SCSI and NVMe use the blk-mq > timeout handler, and both don't seem to be particularly excited about > being called from time context. Does anyone have an objection against > the patch below that switches it to use a delayed work item? I could > make use of this quickly for NVMe, but for SCSI we still have to deal > with the old request code which can't be switched to a delayed work > as easily. No that's definitely fine with me, imho most error handling callbacks should be in process context for ease of use in the driver. -- Jens Axboe