From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
axboe@kernel.dk, neil@brown.name, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, colyli@kernel.org, xni@redhat.com,
yi.zhang@huawei.com, yangerkun@huawei.com,
johnny.chenyi@huawei.com, "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@huawei.com>,
tieren@fnnas.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: fix disordered IO in the case recursive split
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 02:17:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aKwqGHE_ImVwoH6B@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <060396d7-797e-b876-9945-1dc9c8cbf2b4@huaweicloud.com>
On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 05:37:15PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Fix bio splitting by the crypto fallback code
Yes.
>
> I'll take look at all the callers of bio_chain(), in theory, we'll have
> different use cases like:
>
> 1) chain old -> new, or chain new -> old
> 2) put old or new to current->bio_list, currently always in the tail,
> we might want a new case to the head;
>
> Perhaps it'll make sense to add high level helpers to do the chain
> and resubmit and convert all callers to use new helpers, want do you
> think?
I don't think chaining really is problem here, but more how bios
are split when already in the block layer. It's been a bit of a
source for problems, so I think we'll need to sort it out. Especially
as the handling of splits for the same device vs devices below the
current one seems a bit problematic in general.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-25 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-21 7:47 [PATCH] block: fix disordered IO in the case recursive split Yu Kuai
2025-08-21 8:06 ` Coly Li
2025-08-21 8:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-21 8:56 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-21 9:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-21 9:33 ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-08-21 9:42 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-21 9:37 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-25 6:15 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-25 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-08-25 9:17 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2025-08-25 9:49 ` Yu Kuai
2025-08-21 15:19 ` Bart Van Assche
2025-08-21 9:16 ` Coly Li
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=aKwqGHE_ImVwoH6B@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=colyli@kernel.org \
--cc=johnny.chenyi@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
--cc=tieren@fnnas.com \
--cc=xni@redhat.com \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
--cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
--cc=yukuai1@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=yukuai3@huawei.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).