From: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] ublk: move device reset into ublk_ch_release()
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:29:48 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z/1wPCiGOlFgcrpq@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250414112554.3025113-6-ming.lei@redhat.com>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 07:25:46PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> ublk_ch_release() is called after ublk char device is closed, when all
> uring_cmd are done, so it is perfect fine to move ublk device reset to
> ublk_ch_release() from ublk_ctrl_start_recovery().
>
> This way can avoid to grab the exiting daemon task_struct too long.
Nice, I had noticed this leak too, where we keep the task struct ref
until the new daemon comes around. Thanks for the fix!
>
> However, reset of the following ublk IO flags has to be moved until ublk
> io_uring queues are ready:
>
> - ubq->canceling
>
> For requeuing IO in case of ublk_nosrv_dev_should_queue_io() before device
> is recovered
>
> - ubq->fail_io
>
> For failing IO in case of UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_FAIL_IO before device is
> recovered
>
> - ublk_io->flags
>
> For preventing using io->cmd
>
> With this way, recovery is simplified a lot.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> index e0213222e3cf..b68bd4172fa8 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> @@ -1074,7 +1074,7 @@ static inline struct ublk_uring_cmd_pdu *ublk_get_uring_cmd_pdu(
>
> static inline bool ubq_daemon_is_dying(struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> {
> - return ubq->ubq_daemon->flags & PF_EXITING;
> + return !ubq->ubq_daemon || ubq->ubq_daemon->flags & PF_EXITING;
> }
>
> /* todo: handle partial completion */
> @@ -1470,6 +1470,37 @@ static const struct blk_mq_ops ublk_mq_ops = {
> .timeout = ublk_timeout,
> };
>
> +static void ublk_queue_reinit(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + /* All old ioucmds have to be completed */
> + ubq->nr_io_ready = 0;
> +
> + /*
> + * old daemon is PF_EXITING, put it now
> + *
> + * It could be NULL in case of closing one quisced device.
> + */
> + if (ubq->ubq_daemon)
> + put_task_struct(ubq->ubq_daemon);
> + /* We have to reset it to NULL, otherwise ub won't accept new FETCH_REQ */
> + ubq->ubq_daemon = NULL;
> + ubq->timeout = false;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ubq->q_depth; i++) {
> + struct ublk_io *io = &ubq->ios[i];
> +
> + /*
> + * UBLK_IO_FLAG_CANCELED is kept for avoiding to touch
> + * io->cmd
> + */
> + io->flags &= UBLK_IO_FLAG_CANCELED;
> + io->cmd = NULL;
> + io->addr = 0;
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int ublk_ch_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> {
> struct ublk_device *ub = container_of(inode->i_cdev,
> @@ -1481,10 +1512,26 @@ static int ublk_ch_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void ublk_reset_ch_dev(struct ublk_device *ub)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++)
> + ublk_queue_reinit(ub, ublk_get_queue(ub, i));
> +
> + /* set to NULL, otherwise new ubq_daemon cannot mmap the io_cmd_buf */
> + ub->mm = NULL;
> + ub->nr_queues_ready = 0;
> + ub->nr_privileged_daemon = 0;
> +}
> +
> static int ublk_ch_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> {
> struct ublk_device *ub = filp->private_data;
>
> + /* all uring_cmd has been done now, reset device & ubq */
> + ublk_reset_ch_dev(ub);
> +
> clear_bit(UB_STATE_OPEN, &ub->state);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1831,6 +1878,24 @@ static void ublk_nosrv_work(struct work_struct *work)
> ublk_cancel_dev(ub);
> }
>
> +/* reset ublk io_uring queue & io flags */
> +static void ublk_reset_io_flags(struct ublk_device *ub)
> +{
> + int i, j;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++) {
> + struct ublk_queue *ubq = ublk_get_queue(ub, i);
> +
> + /* UBLK_IO_FLAG_CANCELED can be cleared now */
> + spin_lock(&ubq->cancel_lock);
Do we need this? I think at this point there shouldn't be any concurrent
activity we need to protect against.
> + for (j = 0; j < ubq->q_depth; j++)
> + ubq->ios[j].flags &= ~UBLK_IO_FLAG_CANCELED;
> + spin_unlock(&ubq->cancel_lock);
> + ubq->canceling = false;
> + ubq->fail_io = false;
> + }
> +}
> +
> /* device can only be started after all IOs are ready */
> static void ublk_mark_io_ready(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> __must_hold(&ub->mutex)
> @@ -1844,8 +1909,12 @@ static void ublk_mark_io_ready(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> if (capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> ub->nr_privileged_daemon++;
> }
> - if (ub->nr_queues_ready == ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues)
> +
> + if (ub->nr_queues_ready == ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues) {
> + /* now we are ready for handling ublk io request */
> + ublk_reset_io_flags(ub);
> complete_all(&ub->completion);
> + }
> }
>
> static void ublk_handle_need_get_data(struct ublk_device *ub, int q_id,
> @@ -2943,41 +3012,14 @@ static int ublk_ctrl_set_params(struct ublk_device *ub,
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static void ublk_queue_reinit(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> -{
> - int i;
> -
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!(ubq->ubq_daemon && ubq_daemon_is_dying(ubq)));
> -
> - /* All old ioucmds have to be completed */
> - ubq->nr_io_ready = 0;
> - /* old daemon is PF_EXITING, put it now */
> - put_task_struct(ubq->ubq_daemon);
> - /* We have to reset it to NULL, otherwise ub won't accept new FETCH_REQ */
> - ubq->ubq_daemon = NULL;
> - ubq->timeout = false;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i < ubq->q_depth; i++) {
> - struct ublk_io *io = &ubq->ios[i];
> -
> - /* forget everything now and be ready for new FETCH_REQ */
> - io->flags = 0;
> - io->cmd = NULL;
> - io->addr = 0;
> - }
> -}
> -
> static int ublk_ctrl_start_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub,
> const struct ublksrv_ctrl_cmd *header)
> {
> int ret = -EINVAL;
> - int i;
>
> mutex_lock(&ub->mutex);
> if (ublk_nosrv_should_stop_dev(ub))
> goto out_unlock;
> - if (!ub->nr_queues_ready)
> - goto out_unlock;
> /*
> * START_RECOVERY is only allowd after:
> *
> @@ -3001,12 +3043,6 @@ static int ublk_ctrl_start_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub,
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> pr_devel("%s: start recovery for dev id %d.\n", __func__, header->dev_id);
> - for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++)
> - ublk_queue_reinit(ub, ublk_get_queue(ub, i));
> - /* set to NULL, otherwise new ubq_daemon cannot mmap the io_cmd_buf */
> - ub->mm = NULL;
> - ub->nr_queues_ready = 0;
> - ub->nr_privileged_daemon = 0;
> init_completion(&ub->completion);
> ret = 0;
> out_unlock:
> @@ -3019,7 +3055,6 @@ static int ublk_ctrl_end_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub,
> {
> int ublksrv_pid = (int)header->data[0];
> int ret = -EINVAL;
> - int i;
>
> pr_devel("%s: Waiting for new ubq_daemons(nr: %d) are ready, dev id %d...\n",
> __func__, ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues, header->dev_id);
> @@ -3039,22 +3074,10 @@ static int ublk_ctrl_end_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub,
> goto out_unlock;
> }
> ub->dev_info.ublksrv_pid = ublksrv_pid;
> + ub->dev_info.state = UBLK_S_DEV_LIVE;
> pr_devel("%s: new ublksrv_pid %d, dev id %d\n",
> __func__, ublksrv_pid, header->dev_id);
> -
> - blk_mq_quiesce_queue(ub->ub_disk->queue);
> - ub->dev_info.state = UBLK_S_DEV_LIVE;
> - for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++) {
> - struct ublk_queue *ubq = ublk_get_queue(ub, i);
> -
> - ubq->canceling = false;
> - ubq->fail_io = false;
> - }
> - blk_mq_unquiesce_queue(ub->ub_disk->queue);
> - pr_devel("%s: queue unquiesced, dev id %d.\n",
> - __func__, header->dev_id);
> blk_mq_kick_requeue_list(ub->ub_disk->queue);
> -
> ret = 0;
> out_unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&ub->mutex);
> --
> 2.47.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-14 20:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-14 11:25 [PATCH 0/9] ublk: simplify & improve IO canceling Ming Lei
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 1/9] ublk: don't try to stop disk if ->ub_disk is NULL Ming Lei
2025-04-14 19:44 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-15 1:32 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 2/9] ublk: properly serialize all FETCH_REQs Ming Lei
2025-04-14 19:58 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 20:39 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-14 20:52 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 21:00 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-15 1:40 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-16 1:13 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-16 1:17 ` Jens Axboe
2025-04-16 2:04 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-16 1:04 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 3/9] ublk: add ublk_force_abort_dev() Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:06 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 4/9] ublk: rely on ->canceling for dealing with ublk_nosrv_dev_should_queue_io Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:15 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-15 1:48 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 5/9] ublk: move device reset into ublk_ch_release() Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:29 ` Uday Shankar [this message]
2025-04-15 1:50 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 6/9] ublk: improve detection and handling of ublk server exit Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:36 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-15 1:54 ` Ming Lei
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 7/9] ublk: remove __ublk_quiesce_dev() Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:37 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 8/9] ublk: simplify aborting ublk request Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:42 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-14 11:25 ` [PATCH 9/9] selftests: ublk: add generic_06 for covering fault inject Ming Lei
2025-04-14 20:44 ` Uday Shankar
2025-04-15 1:57 ` 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=Z/1wPCiGOlFgcrpq@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com \
--to=ushankar@purestorage.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).