public inbox for linux-block@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: don't grab rq's refcount in blk_mq_check_expired()
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 23:10:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRPofJh/dKafevpV@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210811145525.GA61802@C02WT3WMHTD6>

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 08:55:25AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 10:38:38PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Inside blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() we already grabbed request's
> > refcount before calling ->fn(), so needn't to grab it one more time
> > in blk_mq_check_expired().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  block/blk-mq.c | 25 +++++++------------------
> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> > index d2725f94491d..4d3457d2957f 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> > @@ -917,6 +917,10 @@ void blk_mq_put_rq_ref(struct request *rq)
> >  		__blk_mq_free_request(rq);
> >  }
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * This request won't be re-allocated because its refcount is held when
> > + * calling this callback.
> > + */
> >  static bool blk_mq_check_expired(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
> >  		struct request *rq, void *priv, bool reserved)
> >  {
> > @@ -930,27 +934,12 @@ static bool blk_mq_check_expired(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
> >  		return true;
> >  
> >  	/*
> > -	 * We have reason to believe the request may be expired. Take a
> > -	 * reference on the request to lock this request lifetime into its
> > -	 * currently allocated context to prevent it from being reallocated in
> > -	 * the event the completion by-passes this timeout handler.
> > -	 *
> > -	 * If the reference was already released, then the driver beat the
> > -	 * timeout handler to posting a natural completion.
> > -	 */
> > -	if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&rq->ref))
> > -		return true;
> > -
> > -	/*
> > -	 * The request is now locked and cannot be reallocated underneath the
> > -	 * timeout handler's processing. Re-verify this exact request is truly
> > -	 * expired; if it is not expired, then the request was completed and
> > -	 * reallocated as a new request.
> > +	 * Re-verify this exact request is truly expired; if it is not expired,
> > +	 * then the request was completed and reallocated as a new request
> > +	 * after returning from blk_mq_check_expired().
> >  	 */
> >  	if (blk_mq_req_expired(rq, next))
> >  		blk_mq_rq_timed_out(rq, reserved);
> 
> There's no need to check expired twice if the iterator is already taking a
> reference. I had this double check because I didn't want to penalize normal IO
> by preventing it from completing while the timeout handler is running, but it
> looks like the current timeout iterator is going to do that anyway.

Indeed, will clean that in V2.


Thanks,
Ming


      reply	other threads:[~2021-08-11 15:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-11 14:38 [PATCH] blk-mq: don't grab rq's refcount in blk_mq_check_expired() Ming Lei
2021-08-11 14:55 ` Keith Busch
2021-08-11 15:10   ` Ming Lei [this message]

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=YRPofJh/dKafevpV@T590 \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@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