From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>,
Laurence Oberman <loberman@redhat.com>,
Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: New warning in nvme_setup_discard
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2021 12:03:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2455133.St5lIfLNcX@natalenko.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YPFSUfG+fMITAH01@T590>
Hello.
On pátek 16. července 2021 11:33:05 CEST Ming Lei wrote:
> Can you test the following patch?
Sure, building it at the moment, and will give it a try. Also please see my
comments and questions below.
>
> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> index 727955918563..673a634eadd9 100644
> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> @@ -2361,6 +2361,9 @@ static int bfq_request_merge(struct request_queue *q,
> struct request **req, __rq = bfq_find_rq_fmerge(bfqd, bio, q);
> if (__rq && elv_bio_merge_ok(__rq, bio)) {
> *req = __rq;
> +
> + if (blk_discard_mergable(__rq))
> + return ELEVATOR_DISCARD_MERGE;
> return ELEVATOR_FRONT_MERGE;
> }
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index a11b3b53717e..f8707ff7e2fc 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -705,22 +705,6 @@ static void blk_account_io_merge_request(struct request
> *req) }
> }
>
> -/*
> - * Two cases of handling DISCARD merge:
> - * If max_discard_segments > 1, the driver takes every bio
> - * as a range and send them to controller together. The ranges
> - * needn't to be contiguous.
> - * Otherwise, the bios/requests will be handled as same as
> - * others which should be contiguous.
> - */
> -static inline bool blk_discard_mergable(struct request *req)
> -{
> - if (req_op(req) == REQ_OP_DISCARD &&
> - queue_max_discard_segments(req->q) > 1)
> - return true;
> - return false;
> -}
> -
> static enum elv_merge blk_try_req_merge(struct request *req,
> struct request *next)
> {
> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
> index 52ada14cfe45..a5fe2615ec0f 100644
> --- a/block/elevator.c
> +++ b/block/elevator.c
> @@ -336,6 +336,9 @@ enum elv_merge elv_merge(struct request_queue *q, struct
> request **req, __rq = elv_rqhash_find(q, bio->bi_iter.bi_sector);
> if (__rq && elv_bio_merge_ok(__rq, bio)) {
> *req = __rq;
> +
> + if (blk_discard_mergable(__rq))
> + return ELEVATOR_DISCARD_MERGE;
> return ELEVATOR_BACK_MERGE;
> }
>
> diff --git a/block/mq-deadline-main.c b/block/mq-deadline-main.c
> index 6f612e6dc82b..294be0c0db65 100644
> --- a/block/mq-deadline-main.c
> +++ b/block/mq-deadline-main.c
I had to adjust this against v5.13 because there's no mq-deadline-main.c, only
mq-deadline.c (due to Bart series, I assume). I hope this is fine as the patch
applies cleanly.
> @@ -677,6 +677,8 @@ static int dd_request_merge(struct request_queue *q,
> struct request **rq,
>
> if (elv_bio_merge_ok(__rq, bio)) {
> *rq = __rq;
> + if (blk_discard_mergable(__rq))
> + return ELEVATOR_DISCARD_MERGE;
> return ELEVATOR_FRONT_MERGE;
> }
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 3177181c4326..87f00292fd7a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -1521,6 +1521,22 @@ static inline int
> queue_limit_discard_alignment(struct queue_limits *lim, sector return
> offset << SECTOR_SHIFT;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Two cases of handling DISCARD merge:
> + * If max_discard_segments > 1, the driver takes every bio
> + * as a range and send them to controller together. The ranges
> + * needn't to be contiguous.
> + * Otherwise, the bios/requests will be handled as same as
> + * others which should be contiguous.
> + */
> +static inline bool blk_discard_mergable(struct request *req)
> +{
> + if (req_op(req) == REQ_OP_DISCARD &&
> + queue_max_discard_segments(req->q) > 1)
> + return true;
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static inline int bdev_discard_alignment(struct block_device *bdev)
> {
> struct request_queue *q = bdev_get_queue(bdev);
Do I understand correctly that this will be something like:
Fixes: 2705dfb209 ("block: fix discard request merge")
?
Because as the bisection progresses, I've bumped into this commit only.
Without it the issue is not reproducible, at least so far.
Thanks!
--
Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-16 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-15 13:56 New warning in nvme_setup_discard Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-15 14:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-07-15 14:21 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-15 21:37 ` Laurence Oberman
2021-07-16 5:50 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-16 2:16 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-16 5:53 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-16 9:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-16 10:03 ` Oleksandr Natalenko [this message]
2021-07-16 10:41 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-16 12:56 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-17 9:35 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-17 12:11 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-17 12:19 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-17 12:35 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-19 1:40 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-19 6:27 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-20 9:05 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-21 8:00 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-27 15:12 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-27 15:58 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-28 13:44 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-28 15:53 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-28 16:38 ` Oleksandr Natalenko
2021-07-29 3:33 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-29 9:29 ` 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=2455133.St5lIfLNcX@natalenko.name \
--to=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=djeffery@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=loberman@redhat.com \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=paolo.valente@linaro.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=sashal@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).