public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
	"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] dm rq: Avoid that request processing stalls sporadically
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 13:47:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170411174739.GA19620@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1491928005.2654.6.camel@sandisk.com>

On Tue, Apr 11 2017 at 12:26pm -0400,
Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 12:09 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > This has no place in dm-mq (or any blk-mq
> > driver).  If it is needed it should be elevated to blk-mq core to
> > trigger blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue() when BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY is
> > returned from blk_mq_ops' .queue_rq.
> 
> Hello Mike,
> 
> If the blk-mq core would have to figure out whether or not a queue is no
> longer busy without any cooperation from the blk-mq driver all the blk-mq
> core could do is to attempt to rerun that queue from time to time. But at
> which intervals should the blk-mq core check whether or not a queue is still
> busy? Would it be possible to choose intervals at which to check the queue
> state that work well for all block drivers? Consider e.g. at the dm-mpath
> driver. multipath_busy() returns true as long as path initialization is in
> progress. Path initialization can take a long time. The (indirect) call to
> blk_mq_run_queue() from pg_init_done() resumes request processing immediately
> after path initialization has finished. Sorry but I don't think it is possible
> to invent an algorithm for the blk-mq core that guarantees not only that a
> queue is rerun as soon as it is no longer busy but also that avoids that
> plenty of CPU cycles are wasted by the blk-mq core for checking whether a
> queue is no longer busy.

Sorry but that isn't a very strong argument for what you've done.

I mean I do appreciate your point that the 2 BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY
returns in dm_mq_queue_rq() are not equal but that could easily be
conveyed using a new return value.

Anyway, point is, no blk-mq driver should need to have concern about
whether their request will get resubmitted (and the associated hw queue
re-ran) if they return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY.

Your change is a means to an end but it just solves the problem in a
very hackish way.  Other drivers will very likely be caught about by
this blk-mq quirk in the future.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-11 17:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-07 18:16 [PATCH v4 0/6] Avoid that scsi-mq and dm-mq queue processing stalls sporadically Bart Van Assche
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] blk-mq: Make it safe to use RCU to iterate over blk_mq_tag_set.tag_list Bart Van Assche
2017-04-10  7:10   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] blk-mq: Restart a single queue if tag sets are shared Bart Van Assche
2017-04-10  7:11   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] blk-mq: Clarify comments in blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list() Bart Van Assche
2017-04-10  7:11   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] blk-mq: Introduce blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue() Bart Van Assche
2017-04-10  7:12   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-10 15:02     ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] scsi: Avoid that SCSI queues get stuck Bart Van Assche
2017-04-10  7:12   ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-04-07 18:16 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] dm rq: Avoid that request processing stalls sporadically Bart Van Assche
2017-04-11 16:09   ` Mike Snitzer
2017-04-11 16:26     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-11 17:47       ` Mike Snitzer [this message]
2017-04-11 17:51         ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-11 18:03           ` Mike Snitzer
2017-04-11 18:18             ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-12  3:42               ` Ming Lei
2017-04-12 18:38                 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-13  2:20                   ` Ming Lei
2017-04-13 16:59                     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-14  1:13                       ` Ming Lei
2017-04-14 17:12                         ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-16 10:21                           ` Ming Lei
2017-04-07 18:23 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] Avoid that scsi-mq and dm-mq queue " Jens Axboe
2017-04-07 18:33   ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-07 18:39     ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-07 18:51       ` Jens Axboe
2017-04-12 10:55 ` Benjamin Block
2017-04-12 18:11   ` Bart Van Assche
2017-04-13 12:23     ` Benjamin Block

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=20170411174739.GA19620@redhat.com \
    --to=snitzer@redhat.com \
    --cc=Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox