public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@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>,
	"snitzer@redhat.com" <snitzer@redhat.com>,
	"axboe@kernel.dk" <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] dm rq: Avoid that request processing stalls sporadically
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 18:21:50 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170416102149.GA2538@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1492189969.2644.9.camel@sandisk.com>

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 05:12:50PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-04-14 at 09:13 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 09:59:57AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > On 04/12/17 19:20, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 06:38:07PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > > If the blk-mq core would always rerun a hardware queue if a block driver
> > > > > returns BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY then that would cause 100% of a single CPU core
> > > > 
> > > > It won't casue 100% CPU utilization since we restart queue in completion
> > > > path and at that time at least one tag is available, then progress can be
> > > > made.
> > > 
> > > Hello Ming,
> > > 
> > > Sorry but you are wrong. If .queue_rq() returns BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY
> > > then it's likely that calling .queue_rq() again after only a few
> > > microseconds will cause it to return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY again. If you
> > > don't believe me, change "if (!blk_mq_sched_needs_restart(hctx) &&
> > > !test_bit(BLK_MQ_S_TAG_WAITING, &hctx->state)) blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx,
> > > true);" into "blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);", trigger a busy
> > 
> > Yes, that can be true, but I mean it is still OK to run the queue again
> > with
> > 
> > 	if (!blk_mq_sched_needs_restart(hctx) &&
> > 	    !test_bit(BLK_MQ_S_TAG_WAITING, &hctx->state))
> > 			blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);
> > 
> > and restarting queue in __blk_mq_finish_request() when
> > BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY is returned from .queue_rq(). And both are in current
> > blk-mq implementation.
> > 
> > Then why do we need blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(hctx, 100/*ms*/) in dm?
> 
> Because if dm_mq_queue_rq() returns BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY that there is no
> guarantee that __blk_mq_finish_request() will be called later on for the
> same queue. dm_mq_queue_rq() can e.g. return BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY while no
> dm requests are in progress because the SCSI error handler is active for
> all underlying paths. See also scsi_lld_busy() and scsi_host_in_recovery().

OK, thanks Bart for the explanation.

Looks a very interesting BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY case which isn't casued by
too many pending I/O, and will study more about this case.


Thanks,
Ming

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-16 10:21 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
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 [this message]
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=20170416102149.GA2538@ming.t460p \
    --to=ming.lei@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 \
    --cc=snitzer@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox