From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Laurence Oberman <loberman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: recalculate segment count for multi-segment discard requests correctly
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 11:33:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210202033343.GA165584@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210201164850.391332-1-djeffery@redhat.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 11:48:50AM -0500, David Jeffery wrote:
> When a stacked block device inserts a request into another block device
> using blk_insert_cloned_request, the request's nr_phys_segments field gets
> recalculated by a call to blk_recalc_rq_segments in
> blk_cloned_rq_check_limits. But blk_recalc_rq_segments does not know how to
> handle multi-segment discards. For disk types which can handle
> multi-segment discards like nvme, this results in discard requests which
> claim a single segment when it should report several, triggering a warning
> in nvme and causing nvme to fail the discard from the invalid state.
>
> WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 191 at drivers/nvme/host/core.c:700 nvme_setup_discard+0x170/0x1e0 [nvme_core]
> ...
> nvme_setup_cmd+0x217/0x270 [nvme_core]
> nvme_loop_queue_rq+0x51/0x1b0 [nvme_loop]
> __blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0xe7/0x1b0
> blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0x41/0x70
> ? blk_account_io_start+0x40/0x50
> dm_mq_queue_rq+0x200/0x3e0
> blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0x10a/0x7d0
> ? __sbitmap_queue_get+0x25/0x90
> ? elv_rb_del+0x1f/0x30
> ? deadline_remove_request+0x55/0xb0
> ? dd_dispatch_request+0x181/0x210
> __blk_mq_do_dispatch_sched+0x144/0x290
> ? bio_attempt_discard_merge+0x134/0x1f0
> __blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x129/0x180
> blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0x30/0x60
> __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0x47/0xe0
> __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0x15b/0x170
> blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0x68/0xe0
> blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0xf0/0x170
> blk_finish_plug+0x36/0x50
> xlog_cil_committed+0x19f/0x290 [xfs]
> xlog_cil_process_committed+0x57/0x80 [xfs]
> xlog_state_do_callback+0x1e0/0x2a0 [xfs]
> xlog_ioend_work+0x2f/0x80 [xfs]
> process_one_work+0x1b6/0x350
> worker_thread+0x53/0x3e0
> ? process_one_work+0x350/0x350
> kthread+0x11b/0x140
> ? __kthread_bind_mask+0x60/0x60
> ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
>
> This patch fixes blk_recalc_rq_segments to be aware of devices which can
> have multi-segment discards. It calculates the correct discard segment
> count by counting the number of bio as each discard bio is considered its
> own segment.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>
> Tested-by: Laurence Oberman <loberman@redhat.com>
> ---
> block/blk-merge.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index 808768f6b174..fe7358bd5d09 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -382,6 +382,13 @@ unsigned int blk_recalc_rq_segments(struct request *rq)
>
> switch (bio_op(rq->bio)) {
> case REQ_OP_DISCARD:
> + if (queue_max_discard_segments(rq->q) > 1) {
> + struct bio *bio = rq->bio;
> + for_each_bio(bio)
> + nr_phys_segs++;
> + return nr_phys_segs;
> + }
> + /* fall through */
> case REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE:
REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE needs to be covered since block layer treats
the two in very similar way from discard viewpoint.
Also single range discard should be fixed too, since block layer
thinks single-range discard req segment is 1. Otherwise, the warning in
virtblk_setup_discard_write_zeroes() still may be triggered, at least.
--
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-02 3:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-01 16:48 [PATCH] block: recalculate segment count for multi-segment discard requests correctly David Jeffery
2021-02-02 3:33 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-02-02 20:43 ` David Jeffery
2021-02-03 2:35 ` Ming Lei
2021-02-03 3:15 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-02-03 13:50 ` Laurence Oberman
2021-02-03 15:08 ` Laurence Oberman
2021-02-03 3:18 ` Chaitanya Kulkarni
2021-02-03 16:23 ` David Jeffery
2021-02-04 2:18 ` Ming Lei
2021-02-04 2:27 ` Ming Lei
2021-02-04 16:43 ` Laurence Oberman
2021-02-08 18:53 ` Laurence Oberman
2021-02-08 18:58 ` John Pittman
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=20210202033343.GA165584@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=djeffery@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loberman@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).