From: keith.busch@intel.com (Keith Busch)
Subject: [PATCH] nvme_fc: correct hang in nvme_ns_remove()
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 16:46:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180111234636.GA3243@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb86826e-3850-013b-ca07-e89021ea572e@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018@03:34:58PM -0800, James Smart wrote:
> If you compare behavior of FC with rdma, rdma starts the queues at the tail
> end of losing connectivity to the device - meaning any pending io and any
> future io issued while connectivity has yet to
> be re-established (e.g. in RECONNECTING state) will fail with an io
> error. This is good, if there is a multipathing config, as it's a
> near-immediate fast fail scenario. But... if there is no multipath,
> it means applications and filesystems are now seeing io errors while
> connectivity is pending and that can be disastrous. FC currently
> leaves the queues quiesced while connectivity is pending so io errors are
> not seen. But this means FC won't fastfail the ios to the
> multipath'er.
>
> For now I want to fix this keeping the existing FC behavior. From there, I'd
> like the transports to block like FC does so no errors. However, a new timer
> would be introduced for a "fast failure timeout" - which starts at loss of
> connectivity and when expires, starts the queues and fails any pending and
> future io.
>
> Thoughts ?
Yes, I think that sounds ok.
Longer term, I think it's a bit tacky that we rely on queue_rq to check
for early termination states. Since we can quiece blk-mq, it'd be better
if we introduce another tag iterator to end unstarted requests directly
when we need to give up on the request, rather than rely on queue_rq. I
was going to post a patch that does just that, but I still haven't gotten
a chance to test it... :(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-11 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-11 23:21 [PATCH] nvme_fc: correct hang in nvme_ns_remove() James Smart
2018-01-11 23:34 ` James Smart
2018-01-11 23:46 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2018-01-14 10:44 ` Sagi Grimberg
2018-01-14 10:44 ` Sagi Grimberg
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=20180111234636.GA3243@localhost.localdomain \
--to=keith.busch@intel.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