From: axboe@fb.com (Jens Axboe)
Subject: [PATCH, RFC] blk-mq: use a delayed work item for timeouts
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:26:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <561C1773.9020309@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151012202217.GA880@lst.de>
On 10/12/2015 02:22 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015@02:08:04PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> No that's definitely fine with me, imho most error handling callbacks
>>> should be in process context for ease of use in the driver.
>>
>> Took a closer look. The patch looks incomplete. The hot path for blk-mq is
>> blk_add_timer(), looks like you left that one alone in the conversion?
>
> Oh, damn. I had that part in my initial version that also crudely
> converted the old request code and dropped a bit too much. That should
> defintively do the queue_deayed_work.
Yep
>> Might be easier to just leave the timer alone, and if it actually fires
>> _and_ we have to do something, punt to a workqueue instead of invoking the
>> timeout handler directly.
>
> queue_delayed_work just assigns two additional fields, then sets
> timer->experies and does an add_timer. So it's the generic implementation
> of your above scheme. I'd much rather use the generic version if
> possible instead of trying to recreate it.
I agree, converting to delayed work in general is the cleaner solution.
The hot path is really NOT doing anything at all, that's the usual path.
If it isn't, then we've screwed up. And the conversion to
delayed_work_pending() from timer_pending() looks fine as well, that's
another important piece.
--
Jens Axboe
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: hare@suse.de, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] blk-mq: use a delayed work item for timeouts
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:26:27 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <561C1773.9020309@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151012202217.GA880@lst.de>
On 10/12/2015 02:22 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 02:08:04PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> No that's definitely fine with me, imho most error handling callbacks
>>> should be in process context for ease of use in the driver.
>>
>> Took a closer look. The patch looks incomplete. The hot path for blk-mq is
>> blk_add_timer(), looks like you left that one alone in the conversion?
>
> Oh, damn. I had that part in my initial version that also crudely
> converted the old request code and dropped a bit too much. That should
> defintively do the queue_deayed_work.
Yep
>> Might be easier to just leave the timer alone, and if it actually fires
>> _and_ we have to do something, punt to a workqueue instead of invoking the
>> timeout handler directly.
>
> queue_delayed_work just assigns two additional fields, then sets
> timer->experies and does an add_timer. So it's the generic implementation
> of your above scheme. I'd much rather use the generic version if
> possible instead of trying to recreate it.
I agree, converting to delayed work in general is the cleaner solution.
The hot path is really NOT doing anything at all, that's the usual path.
If it isn't, then we've screwed up. And the conversion to
delayed_work_pending() from timer_pending() looks fine as well, that's
another important piece.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-12 20:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-12 19:29 [PATCH, RFC] blk-mq: use a delayed work item for timeouts Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-12 19:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-12 19:34 ` Jens Axboe
2015-10-12 19:34 ` Jens Axboe
2015-10-12 20:08 ` Jens Axboe
2015-10-12 20:08 ` Jens Axboe
2015-10-12 20:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-12 20:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-10-12 20:26 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2015-10-12 20:26 ` 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=561C1773.9020309@fb.com \
--to=axboe@fb.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.