From: Patrick Farrell <paf@cray.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>, Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
"Andreas Dilger" <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lustre <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH 15/16] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_unregister_reply
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:09:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D65D8A40.C5E44%paf@cray.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <151358148034.5099.17386685003288433122.stgit@noble>
This should not contribute to load, since it¹s called out of the ptlrpcd
daemons.
On 12/18/17, 1:18 AM, "lustre-devel on behalf of NeilBrown"
<lustre-devel-bounces@lists.lustre.org on behalf of neilb@suse.com> wrote:
>replace l_wait_event() with wait_event_timeout() and explicit
>loop. This approach is easier to understand.
>
>Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
>---
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
>b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
>index 3e6d22beb9f5..bb8c9ab68f5f 100644
>--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
>+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/client.c
>@@ -2500,7 +2500,6 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct
>ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
> {
> int rc;
> wait_queue_head_t *wq;
>- struct l_wait_info lwi;
>
> /* Might sleep. */
> LASSERT(!in_interrupt());
>@@ -2543,16 +2542,17 @@ static int ptlrpc_unregister_reply(struct
>ptlrpc_request *request, int async)
> * Network access will complete in finite time but the HUGE
> * timeout lets us CWARN for visibility of sluggish NALs
> */
>- lwi = LWI_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL(LONG_UNLINK * HZ,
>- HZ, NULL, NULL);
>- rc = l_wait_event(*wq, !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
>- &lwi);
>- if (rc == 0) {
>+ int cnt = 0;
>+ while (cnt < LONG_UNLINK &&
>+ (rc = wait_event_timeout(*wq,
>+ !ptlrpc_client_recv_or_unlink(request),
>+ HZ)) == 0)
>+ cnt += 1;
>+ if (rc > 0) {
> ptlrpc_rqphase_move(request, request->rq_next_phase);
> return 1;
> }
>
>- LASSERT(rc == -ETIMEDOUT);
> DEBUG_REQ(D_WARNING, request,
> "Unexpectedly long timeout receiving_reply=%d req_ulinked=%d
>reply_unlinked=%d",
> request->rq_receiving_reply,
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>lustre-devel mailing list
>lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org
>http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-devel-lustre.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-18 21:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-18 7:17 [PATCH SERIES 5: 00/16] staging: lustre: use standard wait_event macros NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:17 ` [PATCH 03/16] staging: lustre: discard cfs_time_seconds() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:17 ` [PATCH 02/16] staging: lustre: replace simple cases of l_wait_event() with wait_event() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 17:48 ` [lustre-devel] " Patrick Farrell
2017-12-18 21:37 ` NeilBrown
2017-12-18 18:03 ` Patrick Farrell
2017-12-19 10:37 ` Dilger, Andreas
2017-12-19 20:49 ` NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:17 ` [PATCH 04/16] staging: lustre: use wait_event_timeout() where appropriate NeilBrown
2017-12-18 20:23 ` [lustre-devel] " Patrick Farrell
2017-12-18 7:17 ` [PATCH 01/16] staging: lustre: discard SVC_SIGNAL and related functions NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 14/16] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_service_unlink_rqbd NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 12/16] staging: lustre: use wait_event_timeout in ptlrpcd() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 08/16] staging: lustre: open code polling loop instead of using l_wait_event() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 20:55 ` [lustre-devel] " Patrick Farrell
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 10/16] staging: lustre: remove back_to_sleep() and use loops NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 16/16] staging: lustre: remove l_wait_event from ptlrpc_set_wait NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 11/16] staging: lustre: make polling loop in ptlrpc_unregister_bulk more obvious NeilBrown
2017-12-18 21:03 ` [lustre-devel] " Patrick Farrell
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 07/16] staging: lustre: simplify waiting in ldlm_completion_ast() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 06/16] staging: lustre: simplify l_wait_event when intr handler but no timeout NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 09/16] staging: lustre: simplify waiting in ptlrpc_invalidate_import() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 05/16] staging: lustre: introduce and use l_wait_event_abortable() NeilBrown
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 15/16] staging: lustre: use explicit poll loop in ptlrpc_unregister_reply NeilBrown
2017-12-18 21:09 ` Patrick Farrell [this message]
2017-12-18 7:18 ` [PATCH 13/16] staging: lustre: improve waiting in sptlrpc_req_refresh_ctx NeilBrown
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=D65D8A40.C5E44%paf@cray.com \
--to=paf@cray.com \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jsimmons@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=oleg.drokin@intel.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