From: Mohamed Khalfella <mkhalfella@purestorage.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Amit Chaudhary <achaudhary@purestorage.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
randyj@purestorage.com, jmeneghi@redhat.com, emilne@redhat.com,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] nvme-multipath: Skip nr_active increments in RETRY disposition
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 18:14:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250925011427.GC3269-mkhalfella@purestorage.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aNR4m9wrO5cgFZIe@kbusch-mbp>
On 2025-09-24 17:02:51 -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 03:43:18PM -0700, Amit Chaudhary wrote:
> > static inline void nvme_start_request(struct request *rq)
> > {
> > - if (rq->cmd_flags & REQ_NVME_MPATH)
> > + if ((rq->cmd_flags & REQ_NVME_MPATH) && (!nvme_req(rq)->retries))
> > nvme_mpath_start_request(rq);
> > blk_mq_start_request(rq);
> > }
>
> Using "retries" is bit indirect as a proxy for multipath active counts.
> Could this be moved to the mpath start instead, directly using the flag
> that accounts for the path? This also helps to keep track if the command
> gets retried across a user toggling the policy to "qd".
>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c b/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
> index 3da980dc60d91..1c630967ddd40 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
> @@ -182,7 +182,8 @@ void nvme_mpath_start_request(struct request *rq)
> struct nvme_ns *ns = rq->q->queuedata;
> struct gendisk *disk = ns->head->disk;
>
> - if (READ_ONCE(ns->head->subsys->iopolicy) == NVME_IOPOLICY_QD) {
> + if (READ_ONCE(ns->head->subsys->iopolicy) == NVME_IOPOLICY_QD &&
> + !(nvme_req(rq)->flags & NVME_MPATH_CNT_ACTIVE)) {
> atomic_inc(&ns->ctrl->nr_active);
> nvme_req(rq)->flags |= NVME_MPATH_CNT_ACTIVE;
> }
> --
193 nvme_req(rq)->flags |= NVME_MPATH_IO_STATS;
194 nvme_req(rq)->start_time = bdev_start_io_acct(disk->part0, req_op(rq),
195 jiffies);
Doing it this way might messup with stats accounting because the two
lines above will be executed on request retry. I do not think we need
that, right?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-25 1:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-24 22:43 [PATCH 1/1] nvme-multipath: Skip nr_active increments in RETRY disposition Amit Chaudhary
2025-09-24 23:02 ` Keith Busch
2025-09-25 1:14 ` Mohamed Khalfella [this message]
2025-09-25 14:43 ` Keith Busch
2025-09-25 15:59 ` Mohamed Khalfella
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=20250925011427.GC3269-mkhalfella@purestorage.com \
--to=mkhalfella@purestorage.com \
--cc=achaudhary@purestorage.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=emilne@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=randyj@purestorage.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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