public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: avoid to synchronize rcu inside blk_cleanup_queue()
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 08:58:39 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8024ab9d-ae82-c8f2-83e3-a9d8fa4ba303@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180622114204.4ohrk53td3iijamc@kamzik.brq.redhat.com>

On 6/22/18 5:42 AM, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:55:22AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> SCSI probing may synchronously create and destroy a lot of request_queues
>> for non-existent devices. Any synchronize_rcu() in queue creation or
>> destroy path may introduce long latency during booting, see detailed
>> description in comment of blk_register_queue().
>>
>> This patch removes two synchronize_rcu() inside blk_cleanup_queue()
>> for this case:
>>
>> 1) commit c2856ae2f315d75(blk-mq: quiesce queue before freeing queue)
>> need synchronize_rcu() for implementing blk_mq_quiesce_queue(), but
>> when queue isn't initialized, it isn't necessary to do that since
>> only pass-through requests are involved, no original issue in
>> scsi_execute() at all.
>>
>> 2) when only one request queue is attached to tags, no necessary to
>> call synchronize_rcu() too.
>>
>> Without this patch, it may take more 20+ seconds for virtio-scsi to
>> complete disk probe. With this patch, the time becomes less than 100ms.
>>
>> Reported-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
>> Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  block/blk-core.c | 8 ++++++--
>>  block/blk-mq.c   | 5 ++++-
>>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
>> index cf0ee764b908..f0129e20b773 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-core.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
>> @@ -766,9 +766,13 @@ void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>>  	 * make sure all in-progress dispatch are completed because
>>  	 * blk_freeze_queue() can only complete all requests, and
>>  	 * dispatch may still be in-progress since we dispatch requests
>> -	 * from more than one contexts
>> +	 * from more than one contexts.
>> +	 *
>> +	 * No need to quiesce queue if it isn't initialized yet since
>> +	 * blk_freeze_queue() should be enough for cases of passthrough
>> +	 * request.
>>  	 */
>> -	if (q->mq_ops)
>> +	if (q->mq_ops && blk_queue_init_done(q))
>>  		blk_mq_quiesce_queue(q);
>>  
>>  	/* for synchronous bio-based driver finish in-flight integrity i/o */
>> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
>> index 70c65bb6c013..63680b243466 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
>> @@ -2351,6 +2351,7 @@ static void blk_mq_update_tag_set_depth(struct blk_mq_tag_set *set,
>>  static void blk_mq_del_queue_tag_set(struct request_queue *q)
>>  {
>>  	struct blk_mq_tag_set *set = q->tag_set;
>> +	bool shared = true;
>>  
>>  	mutex_lock(&set->tag_list_lock);
>>  	list_del_rcu(&q->tag_set_list);
>> @@ -2359,9 +2360,11 @@ static void blk_mq_del_queue_tag_set(struct request_queue *q)
>>  		set->flags &= ~BLK_MQ_F_TAG_SHARED;
>>  		/* update existing queue */
>>  		blk_mq_update_tag_set_depth(set, false);
>> +		shared = true;
> 
> I guess this should be '= false'.
> 
>>  	}
>>  	mutex_unlock(&set->tag_list_lock);
>> -	synchronize_rcu();
>> +	if (shared)
>> +		synchronize_rcu();
>>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&q->tag_set_list);
>>  }
>>
> 
> With the '= false' change I tested this and it resolves the issue for me.

That logic still doesn't look correct to me. Does the below work?


diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index afd2596ea3d3..222d4fc0e524 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -762,9 +762,13 @@ void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
 	 * make sure all in-progress dispatch are completed because
 	 * blk_freeze_queue() can only complete all requests, and
 	 * dispatch may still be in-progress since we dispatch requests
-	 * from more than one contexts
+	 * from more than one contexts.
+	 *
+	 * No need to quiesce queue if it isn't initialized yet since
+	 * blk_freeze_queue() should be enough for cases of passthrough
+	 * request.
 	 */
-	if (q->mq_ops)
+	if (q->mq_ops && blk_queue_init_done(q))
 		blk_mq_quiesce_queue(q);
 
 	/* for synchronous bio-based driver finish in-flight integrity i/o */
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 8e57b84e50e9..18ad2b95ff63 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -2351,8 +2351,12 @@ static void blk_mq_update_tag_set_depth(struct blk_mq_tag_set *set,
 static void blk_mq_del_queue_tag_set(struct request_queue *q)
 {
 	struct blk_mq_tag_set *set = q->tag_set;
+	bool shared;
 
 	mutex_lock(&set->tag_list_lock);
+
+	shared = !list_is_singular(&set->tag_list);
+
 	list_del_rcu(&q->tag_set_list);
 	if (list_is_singular(&set->tag_list)) {
 		/* just transitioned to unshared */
@@ -2361,7 +2365,8 @@ static void blk_mq_del_queue_tag_set(struct request_queue *q)
 		blk_mq_update_tag_set_depth(set, false);
 	}
 	mutex_unlock(&set->tag_list_lock);
-	synchronize_rcu();
+	if (shared)
+		synchronize_rcu();
 	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&q->tag_set_list);
 }
 

-- 
Jens Axboe

  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-22 14:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-20  2:55 [PATCH] blk-mq: avoid to synchronize rcu inside blk_cleanup_queue() Ming Lei
2018-06-22 11:42 ` Andrew Jones
2018-06-22 14:58   ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2018-06-22 21:31     ` Ming Lei
2018-06-22 22:00       ` Jens Axboe
2018-06-22 14:47 ` Jens Axboe
2018-06-22 21:33   ` Ming Lei

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=8024ab9d-ae82-c8f2-83e3-a9d8fa4ba303@kernel.dk \
    --to=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=drjones@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=ming.lei@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