From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canoical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: remove unnecessary blk_clear_rq_complete()
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 18:26:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140918162638.GA3950@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVOsHO28yTQN8uPgOgtrTjrs52Le01wChxdYyjeBr0ZcOQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 09:33:35AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Why yo you think it's not nessecary? The request is not in the drivers
>
> The COMPLETED flag will be cleared in blk_mq_start_request(), so
> it needn't to be cleared here, and it is a bit early and might cause
> a tiny race window.
>
> > hand at this point, so it should not be marked started. Maybe I'm missing
> > something, but this sounds like it could very likely cause regressions.
>
> The STARTED flag has been cleared in __blk_mq_requeue_request(),
> I mean the COMPLETED flag, consider the following situation:
>
> - one req is queued to driver, and the req is completed from
> the device just before its timeout expired
> - the driver checks the result and finds it need to requeue for some reason
> - blk_mq_requeue_request() is called to requeue the req
> - COMPLETED is cleared before clearing STARTED because of
> writes reorder
> - timeout just comes between the two writes
> - then the request may be completed another time because of timeout
Ok, I guess you are right on this one. Objection cleared.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-18 16:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-17 9:47 [PATCH 0/2] blk-mq: fix race between timeout and queue_rq Ming Lei
2014-09-17 9:47 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Ming Lei
2014-09-17 16:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-17 9:47 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-mq: remove unnecessary blk_clear_rq_complete() Ming Lei
2014-09-17 16:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2014-09-18 1:33 ` Ming Lei
2014-09-18 16:26 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
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=20140918162638.GA3950@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canoical.com \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).