From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Snitzer Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] block: don't call blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue() in case of BLK_STS_RESOURCE Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 12:03:13 -0400 Message-ID: <20170919160312.GC22809@redhat.com> References: <20170915164456.9803-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20170915164456.9803-2-ming.lei@redhat.com> <1505498249.3420.15.camel@wdc.com> <20170917124000.GB6289@ming.t460p> <1505747894.2685.6.camel@wdc.com> <20170919054308.GA2517@ming.t460p> <20170919154823.GA22809@redhat.com> <1505836356.2671.21.camel@wdc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1505836356.2671.21.camel@wdc.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bart Van Assche Cc: "ming.lei@redhat.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "hch@infradead.org" , "sagi@grimberg.me" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "axboe@fb.com" , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" , "jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "loberman@redhat.com" , "dm-devel@redhat.com" List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 19 2017 at 11:52am -0400, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Tue, 2017-09-19 at 11:48 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > This thread proves that it is definitely brittle to be relying on fixed > > delays like this: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9703249/ > > Hello Mike, > > Sorry but I think that's a misinterpretation of my patch. I came up with that > patch before I had found and fixed the root cause of the high system load. > These fixes are upstream (kernel v4.13) which means that that patch is now > obsolete. OK, fair point. Though fixed magic values for delay aren't going to stand the test of time.