From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: make sure to back-assign the request to rq_map in blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 08:59:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170227165959.GD10715@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1488209781-1084-2-git-send-email-sagi@grimberg.me>
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 05:36:21PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> Otherwise we won't be able to retrieve the request from
> the tag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
> ---
> block/blk-mq.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index d84c66fb37b7..9611cd9920e9 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -312,6 +312,7 @@ struct request *blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(struct request_queue *q, int rw,
> ret = -EWOULDBLOCK;
> goto out_queue_exit;
> }
> + alloc_data.hctx->tags->rqs[rq->tag] = rq;
>
> return rq;
>
> --
> 2.7.4
This one I think is a little bit cleaner if we just push that assignment
into __blk_mq_alloc_request() like this (again, compile tested only):
diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
index 98c7b061781e..7267c9c23529 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
@@ -135,8 +135,6 @@ struct request *blk_mq_sched_get_request(struct request_queue *q,
rq = __blk_mq_alloc_request(data, op);
} else {
rq = __blk_mq_alloc_request(data, op);
- if (rq)
- data->hctx->tags->rqs[rq->tag] = rq;
}
if (rq) {
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 9e6b064e5339..b4cf9dfa926b 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -234,6 +234,7 @@ struct request *__blk_mq_alloc_request(struct blk_mq_alloc_data *data,
}
rq->tag = tag;
rq->internal_tag = -1;
+ data->hctx->tags->rqs[rq->tag] = rq;
}
blk_mq_rq_ctx_init(data->q, data->ctx, rq, op);
Looking a little closer at the caller, though, this is kind of weird:
struct request *nvme_alloc_request(struct request_queue *q,
struct nvme_command *cmd, unsigned int flags, int qid)
{
unsigned op = nvme_is_write(cmd) ? REQ_OP_DRV_OUT : REQ_OP_DRV_IN;
struct request *req;
if (qid == NVME_QID_ANY) {
req = blk_mq_alloc_request(q, op, flags);
} else {
req = blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(q, op, flags,
qid ? qid - 1 : 0);
}
if (IS_ERR(req))
return req;
req->cmd_flags |= REQ_FAILFAST_DRIVER;
nvme_req(req)->cmd = cmd;
return req;
}
In the "any" case, we allocate a request with a scheduler tag and go
through the scheduler as usual. In the hctx case, we're getting a
request with a driver tag, meaning we go through the
blk_mq_sched_bypass_insert() path when we run the request.
There's nothing really wrong about that, it just seems weird. Not sure
if it's weird enough to act on :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-27 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-27 15:36 [PATCH 1/2] blk-mq-sched: Allocate sched reserved tags as specified in the original queue tagset Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-27 15:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: make sure to back-assign the request to rq_map in blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-27 16:59 ` Omar Sandoval [this message]
2017-02-27 17:03 ` Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 17:04 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-02-27 17:06 ` Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 17:26 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-27 15:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-mq-sched: Allocate sched reserved tags as specified in the original queue tagset Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 15:49 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-02-27 15:53 ` Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 16:10 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-27 16:14 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-02-27 16:17 ` Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 16:15 ` Jens Axboe
2017-02-27 16:23 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-02-27 16:25 ` Omar Sandoval
2017-02-27 16:27 ` 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=20170227165959.GD10715@vader \
--to=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox