From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Mark Lord <kernel@teksavvy.com>
Cc: dgilbert@interlog.com,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Joel Becker <joel.becker@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent?
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:12:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C9C6B7D.1060805@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C9C2039.8050903@teksavvy.com>
On 2010-09-24 05:51, Mark Lord wrote:
> On 10-09-23 10:53 PM, Mark Lord wrote:
>> On 10-09-23 08:05 PM, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
>>> Mark,
>>> If you issued the SG_IO ioctl with a timeout of at
>>> least 66 minutes (expressed in milliseconds) then
>>> it looks like ata_scsi_queuecmd() has a problem.
>> ..
>>
>> Mmm.. more like blk_execute_rq() perhaps.
>> That's where the wait_for_completion(&wait) call is at.
>>
>> Perhaps I should change it to wait in smaller increments,
>> so that the lockup detection doesn't trigger on it..
> ..
>
> This patch (below) seems to work.
>
> Does this look kosher enough for me to roll it up
> as a proper patch submission? Jens? Joel?
Ideally it would be nice to just pass the info down that it should not
complain, since waiting > 120 seconds (or whatever the timeout is set
to) is expected by the caller in some cases.
But your patch is simple enough and it gets the job done. I will queue
it up for .37 if you send a properly formatted and signed-off-by
version.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-24 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-23 23:41 "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent? Mark Lord
2010-09-24 0:05 ` Douglas Gilbert
2010-09-24 2:53 ` Mark Lord
2010-09-24 3:51 ` Mark Lord
2010-09-24 9:12 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2010-09-24 13:51 ` [PATCH] block: Prevent hang_check firing during long I/O Mark Lord
2010-09-24 13:52 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-24 4:41 ` "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent? Douglas Gilbert
2010-09-24 0:51 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-09-24 1:37 ` Kyle McMartin
2010-09-24 3:48 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-09-24 5:02 ` Douglas Gilbert
2010-09-24 5:31 ` Mark Lord
2010-09-24 6:22 ` Stan Hoeppner
2010-09-24 6:30 ` hdparm-9.32 released: recommended upgrade Mark Lord
2010-09-24 1:58 ` "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent? Maxim Levitsky
2010-09-24 2:08 ` Kyle McMartin
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=4C9C6B7D.1060805@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=joel.becker@oracle.com \
--cc=kernel@teksavvy.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).