Linux block layer
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
To: Yoav Cohen <yoav@nvidia.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, csander@purestorage.com,
	jholzman@nvidia.com, omril@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ublk: complete requests via blk_mq_complete_request() so rq_affinity applies
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2026 09:56:42 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <asUMKqdP3PwEnJBk@fedora-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261006085517.33974-2-yoav@nvidia.com>

On Tue, Oct 06, 2026 at 11:55:16AM +0300, Yoav Cohen wrote:
> ublk ends successfully completed requests inline on the server thread
> that issued UBLK_IO_COMMIT_AND_FETCH_REQ, so rq_affinity never
> redirects completion back to the submitting CPU, unlike NVMe, SCSI,
> virtio-blk, loop, nbd and rnbd.
> 
> Route completion through blk_mq_complete_request_remote(), with a new
> ->complete() callback, ublk_end_rq(). Add UBLK_F_SUPPORT_RQ_AFFINITY
> so servers can detect support via UBLK_CMD_GET_FEATURES.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yoav Cohen <yoav@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/block/ublk_drv.c      | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h |  8 ++++
>  2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> index 66eb55e7162e..48bdb5d782ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> @@ -90,7 +90,8 @@
>  		| UBLK_F_BATCH_IO \
>  		| UBLK_F_NO_AUTO_PART_SCAN \
>  		| UBLK_F_SHMEM_ZC \
> -		| UBLK_F_IO_DESC_SIZE)
> +		| UBLK_F_IO_DESC_SIZE \
> +		| UBLK_F_SUPPORT_RQ_AFFINITY)
>  
>  #define UBLK_F_ALL_RECOVERY_FLAGS (UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY \
>  		| UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE \
> @@ -1549,13 +1550,54 @@ static void ublk_end_request(struct request *req, blk_status_t error)
>  	local_bh_enable();
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Update @req with its result and requeue it if it was only partially
> + * completed. Returns true if @req was requeued, in which case the caller
> + * must not touch it any further.
> + *
> + * Run bio->bi_end_io() with softirqs disabled. If the final fput happens
> + * off this path, then that will prevent ublk's blkdev_release() from
> + * being called on current's task work, see fput() implementation.
> + *
> + * This matters for the caller completing @req locally on the ublk
> + * server's own thread: it may already be holding disk->open_mutex, e.g.
> + * reading the partition table from bdev_open(), and an fput() running
> + * inline there could deadlock on it. Preferably we would not be doing
> + * IO with a mutex held that is also used for release, but this
> + * work-around will suffice for now. A caller reached instead via
> + * blk_mq_complete_request_remote()'s softirq/IPI redirect never runs on
> + * that thread, so it isn't exposed to this hazard, but disabling
> + * softirqs here is harmless for it too.
> + */
> +static inline bool ublk_update_and_requeue(struct request *req,
> +					   struct ublk_io *io)
> +{
> +	bool requeue;
> +
> +	local_bh_disable();
> +	requeue = blk_update_request(req, BLK_STS_OK, io->res);
> +	local_bh_enable();
> +	if (requeue)
> +		blk_mq_requeue_request(req, true);
> +	return requeue;
> +}
> +
> +static void ublk_end_rq(struct request *req)
> +{
> +	struct ublk_queue *ubq = req->mq_hctx->driver_data;
> +	struct ublk_io *io = &ubq->ios[req->tag];
> +
> +	if (!ublk_update_and_requeue(req, io) &&
> +	    likely(!blk_should_fake_timeout(req->q)))
> +		__blk_mq_end_request(req, BLK_STS_OK);
> +}
> +
>  /* todo: handle partial completion */
>  static inline void __ublk_complete_rq(struct request *req, struct ublk_io *io,
>  				      bool need_map, struct io_comp_batch *iob)
>  {
>  	unsigned int unmapped_bytes;
>  	blk_status_t res = BLK_STS_OK;
> -	bool requeue;
>  
>  	/* failed read IO if nothing is read */
>  	if (!io->res && req_op(req) == REQ_OP_READ)
> @@ -1588,25 +1630,11 @@ static inline void __ublk_complete_rq(struct request *req, struct ublk_io *io,
>  		io->res = unmapped_bytes;
>  	}
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Run bio->bi_end_io() with softirqs disabled. If the final fput
> -	 * happens off this path, then that will prevent ublk's blkdev_release()
> -	 * from being called on current's task work, see fput() implementation.
> -	 *
> -	 * Otherwise, ublk server may not provide forward progress in case of
> -	 * reading the partition table from bdev_open() with disk->open_mutex
> -	 * held, and causes dead lock as we could already be holding
> -	 * disk->open_mutex here.
> -	 *
> -	 * Preferably we would not be doing IO with a mutex held that is also
> -	 * used for release, but this work-around will suffice for now.
> -	 */
> -	local_bh_disable();
> -	requeue = blk_update_request(req, BLK_STS_OK, io->res);
> -	local_bh_enable();
> -	if (requeue)
> -		blk_mq_requeue_request(req, true);
> -	else if (likely(!blk_should_fake_timeout(req->q))) {
> +	if (blk_mq_complete_request_remote(req))
> +		return;

Only copy-mode READs get the new completion path. In __ublk_complete_rq(), anything
that needs no copy back to the request jumps to exit: ublk_end_request(), which
completes inline as before:

- all WRITEs, flush and discard;
- all USER_COPY, ZERO_COPY, AUTO_BUF_REG and shmem zero-copy I/O;
- every error.
    
Only a successful READ in copy mode reaches the new blk_mq_complete_request_remote()
call. So the uapi comment "Request completion honors … rq_affinity" is false for most I/O.

> +
> +	if (!ublk_update_and_requeue(req, io) &&
> +	    likely(!blk_should_fake_timeout(req->q))) {
>  		if (blk_mq_add_to_batch(req, iob, false, blk_mq_end_request_batch))
>  			return;
>  		__blk_mq_end_request(req, BLK_STS_OK);
> @@ -2347,6 +2375,7 @@ static const struct blk_mq_ops ublk_mq_ops = {
>  	.queue_rqs      = ublk_queue_rqs,
>  	.init_hctx	= ublk_init_hctx,
>  	.timeout	= ublk_timeout,
> +	.complete	= ublk_end_rq,
>  };
>  
>  static const struct blk_mq_ops ublk_batch_mq_ops = {
> @@ -2355,6 +2384,7 @@ static const struct blk_mq_ops ublk_batch_mq_ops = {
>  	.queue_rqs      = ublk_batch_queue_rqs,
>  	.init_hctx	= ublk_init_hctx,
>  	.timeout	= ublk_timeout,
> +	.complete	= ublk_end_rq,
>  };
>  
>  static void ublk_queue_reinit(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h b/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> index 33b25dd13965..47b5fba9519c 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> @@ -420,6 +420,14 @@ struct ublk_shmem_buf_reg {
>  /* ublksrv_io_desc size is specified by ublksrv_ctrl_dev_info's io_desc_size */
>  #define UBLK_F_IO_DESC_SIZE (1ULL << 20)
>  
> +/*
> + * Request completion honors the block device's rq_affinity setting
> + * (/sys/block/ublkbN/queue/rq_affinity): the submitting CPU's completion
> + * work can run there instead of always on the ublk server's CPU. Without
> + * this feature, rq_affinity has no effect on ublk devices.
> + */
> +#define UBLK_F_SUPPORT_RQ_AFFINITY (1ULL << 21)

This flag should be checked somewhere given it is passed from userspace,
otherwise it can be nop.


Thanks,
Ming

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-06 14:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-06  8:55 [PATCH 0/2] ublk: complete requests via blk_mq_complete_request() so rq_affinity applies Yoav Cohen
2026-10-06  8:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Yoav Cohen
2026-10-06 14:56   ` Ming Lei [this message]
2026-10-06  8:55 ` [PATCH 2/2] selftests: ublk: add test for rq_affinity completion redirection Yoav Cohen

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=asUMKqdP3PwEnJBk@fedora-laptop \
    --to=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=csander@purestorage.com \
    --cc=jholzman@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=omril@nvidia.com \
    --cc=yoav@nvidia.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