From: Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
SCSI development list <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problems with the block-layer timeouts
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 12:35:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081102203542.GA16507@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0811011214470.21703-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> I spent most of the day yesterday debugging some tricky problems in the
> new block-layer timeout scheme. Clearly it is in need of more work.
>
> A major reason for these problems was that there doesn't seem to be a
> clear a idea of when the timeout period should begin. In
> blk_add_timer() a comment says:
> How should this be fixed? It would help to call scsi_dev_queue_ready()
> before elv_next_request(), but that's not sufficient.
> scsi_times_out() needs to recognize that a timeout for a non-running
> request can be handled by directly returning BLK_EH_HANDLED. Right?
>
>
Tejun described a similar issue here.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/35603
And a fix to address the issue here.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/35725
Does the patch posted by Tejun address your issue?
> While I'm on the subject, there are a few related items that could be
> improved. In my tests, I was generating I/O requests simply by doing
>
> dd if=/dev/sda ...
>
> I don't know where the timeouts for these requests are determined, but
> they were set to 60 seconds. That seems much too long.
>
It is set by a udev rule and the value is historical.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/45631/focus=45646
-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-02 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-01 16:54 Problems with the block-layer timeouts Alan Stern
2008-11-02 20:35 ` Mike Anderson [this message]
2008-11-03 8:52 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 14:18 ` James Smart
2008-11-03 17:23 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-03 15:59 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 16:39 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-03 17:07 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-03 17:27 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-04 3:01 ` Tejun Heo
2008-11-06 0:01 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-06 7:23 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-07 4:05 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-07 11:24 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-11 6:54 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-11 17:11 ` Alan Stern
2008-11-11 19:19 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-12 2:08 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-11-13 10:34 ` Jens Axboe
2008-11-17 3:48 ` FUJITA Tomonori
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=20081102203542.GA16507@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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