From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Andrew Vasquez <andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>,
Linux-SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: calling scsi_adjust_queue_depth() during I/O...
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 17:59:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050805155905.GU5561@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050805155548.GP13374@plap.qlogic.org>
On Fri, Aug 05 2005, Andrew Vasquez wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Aug 2005, Tejun Heo wrote:
>
> > > Oops, forget about the previous mail. Above patch make it into the
> > > tree and it's the source of the problem. My git HEAD was pointing at
> > > the latest update but I haven't updated my cache, so I was looking at
> > > the old source tree. My apologies for the hassle and the bug.
> > >
> > > Original code was broken in the following two points.
> > >
> > > * tag_index wasn't allocated fully
> > > * tag_map's extra bits were always initialized w/ 1's.
> > >
> > > The first bug is critical and the second bug prevents proper enlarging
> > > of tag map. However, the second bug effectively masks the first bug
> > > avoiding critical problem. My above mentioned patch broke things
> > > seriously when reducing tag size on flight.
> > >
> > > Again, my apologies and patch will soon follow.
> >
> > Here's the fix. It basically revives bqt->real_max_depth sans
> > allocation optimization in init_tag_map. I've also added a comment
> > explicitly noting that tag map cannot be shrunk to prevent other
> > morons like me. :-( Please try this one and let me know how it works.
> > If this is the correct fix, I'll repost properly to Jens and lkml with
> > detailed explanation on how it was broken in the original code and how
> > I broke it with my previous patch. Sorry.
>
> OK, 20 minutes into lowering and raising the queue-depth and
> everything appears to be working fine. I'll continue banging away
> with my configuration and let you know if anything else comes up.
> Looks good so far.
Thanks for fixing it so quickly, Tejun! I'll be on vacation next week,
can you make sure it gets to Andrew?
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-05 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-04 23:41 calling scsi_adjust_queue_depth() during I/O Andrew Vasquez
2005-08-05 7:57 ` Jens Axboe
2005-08-05 11:09 ` Tejun Heo
2005-08-05 11:43 ` Tejun Heo
2005-08-05 12:33 ` Tejun Heo
2005-08-05 15:55 ` Andrew Vasquez
2005-08-05 15:59 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2005-08-05 17:15 ` Tejun Heo
2005-08-05 16:32 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-05 17:10 ` Tejun Heo
2005-08-05 17:20 ` James Bottomley
2005-08-05 17:24 ` Andrew Vasquez
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=20050805155905.GU5561@suse.de \
--to=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=andrew.vasquez@qlogic.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.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