public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>
To: "ming.lei@redhat.com" <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
	"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
	"axboe@fb.com" <axboe@fb.com>,
	"dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] blk-mq: use the introduced blk_mq_unquiesce_queue()
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 23:09:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1496358538.3075.12.camel@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170601005423.GA23563@ming.t460p>

On Thu, 2017-06-01 at 08:54 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 03:21:41PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 20:37 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> > > index 99e16ac479e3..ffcf05765e2b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
> > > @@ -3031,7 +3031,10 @@ scsi_internal_device_unblock(struct scsi_device *sdev,
> > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > >  
> > >  	if (q->mq_ops) {
> > > -		blk_mq_start_stopped_hw_queues(q, false);
> > > +		if (blk_queue_quiesced(q))
> > > +			blk_mq_unquiesce_queue(q);
> > > +		else
> > > +			blk_mq_start_stopped_hw_queues(q, false);
> > >  	} else {
> > >  		spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
> > >  		blk_start_queue(q);
> > 
> > As I commented on v2, this change is really wrong. All what's needed here is
> > a call to blk_mq_unquiesce_queue() and nothing else. Adding a call to
> > blk_mq_start_stopped_hw_queues() is wrong because it makes it impossible to
> > use the STOPPED flag in the SCSI core to make the block layer core stop calling
> > .queue_rq() if a SCSI LLD returns "busy".
> 
> I am not sure if I understand your idea, could you explain a bit why it is wrong?
> 
> Let's see the function of scsi_internal_device_block():
> 
> 	if (q->mq_ops) {
>                 if (wait)
>                         blk_mq_quiesce_queue(q);
>                 else
>                         blk_mq_stop_hw_queues(q);
> 	}
> 
> So the queue may be put into quiesced if 'wait' is true, or it is
> stopped if 'wait' is false.
> 
> And this patch just makes the two SCSI APIs symmetrical.
> 
> Since we will not stop queue in blk_mq_quiesce_queue() later,
> I have to unquiese one queue only if it is quiesced.
> 
> So suppose the queue is put into stopped in scsi_internal_device_block(),
> do we expect not to restart it in scsi_internal_device_unblock() via
> blk_mq_unquiesce_queue()?

Hello Ming,

My opinion is that scsi_internal_device_block() and scsi_internal_device_unblock()
should be changed as follows for the scsi-mq code path:
* scsi_internal_device_block() should call blk_mq_quiesce_queue(q) if the "wait"
  argument is true and should set the QUEUE_FLAG_QUIESCED flag if the "wait"
  argument is false.
* scsi_internal_device_unblock() should call blk_mq_unquiesce_queue().

I am aware it sounds weird to set the QUEUE_FLAG_QUIESCED flag without waiting
until ongoing .queue_rq() calls have finished. The only driver that triggers
that code path is the mpt3sas driver. I think it's unfortunate that that driver
has ever been allowed to call scsi_internal_device_block() because it's the only
driver that calls that function from a context where sleeping is not allowed.
No matter whether the scsi_internal_device_block() call from the mpt3sas driver
sets the QUEUE_FLAG_QUIESCED or the BLK_MQ_S_STOPPED flag, I don't think that
will have the effect the authors of this driver intended. Unfortunately I'm not
familiar enough with the mpt3sas driver to fix that driver myself.

Note: these changes conflict with a patch SCSI patch series I started working on
about two months ago. See also https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-scsi/msg109103.html.

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-01 23:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20170531123706.20885-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>
2017-05-31 12:37 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] blk-mq: use the introduced blk_mq_unquiesce_queue() Ming Lei
2017-05-31 15:21   ` Bart Van Assche
2017-06-01  0:54     ` Ming Lei
2017-06-01 23:09       ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2017-06-02  2:00         ` Ming Lei
2017-06-02 22:19           ` Bart Van Assche

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=1496358538.3075.12.camel@sandisk.com \
    --to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
    --cc=axboe@fb.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@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