* FAILED: patch "[PATCH] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree
@ 2024-12-03 10:10 gregkh
2025-03-17 3:30 ` [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced Muchun Song
2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: gregkh @ 2024-12-03 10:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: muchun.song, axboe, ming.lei, songmuchun; +Cc: stable
The patch below does not apply to the 5.15-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.15.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2024120323-snowiness-subway-3844@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.15.y' HEAD^..
Possible dependencies:
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 17:29:32 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started
or unquiesced
Supposing the following scenario with a virtio_blk driver.
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
__blk_mq_issue_directly()
q->mq_ops->queue_rq()
virtio_queue_rq()
blk_mq_stop_hw_queue()
virtblk_done()
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped())
blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_run_hw_queue() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_insert_request()
return
After CPU0 has marked the queue as stopped, CPU1 will see the queue is
stopped. But before CPU1 puts the request on the dispatch list, CPU2
receives the interrupt of completion of request, so it will run the
hardware queue and marks the queue as non-stopped. Meanwhile, CPU1 also
runs the same hardware queue. After both CPU1 and CPU2 complete
blk_mq_run_hw_queue(), CPU1 just puts the request to the same hardware
queue and returns. It misses dispatching a request. Fix it by running
the hardware queue explicitly. And blk_mq_request_issue_directly()
should handle a similar situation. Fix it as well.
Fixes: d964f04a8fde ("blk-mq: fix direct issue")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241014092934.53630-2-songmuchun@bytedance.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 7d05a56e3639..5deb9dffca0a 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -2647,6 +2647,7 @@ static void blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) || blk_queue_quiesced(rq->q)) {
blk_mq_insert_request(rq, 0);
+ blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, false);
return;
}
@@ -2677,6 +2678,7 @@ static blk_status_t blk_mq_request_issue_directly(struct request *rq, bool last)
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) || blk_queue_quiesced(rq->q)) {
blk_mq_insert_request(rq, 0);
+ blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, false);
return BLK_STS_OK;
}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2024-12-03 10:10 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree gregkh
@ 2025-03-17 3:30 ` Muchun Song
2025-03-17 6:56 ` Greg KH
2025-03-17 16:39 ` Sasha Levin
2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Muchun Song @ 2025-03-17 3:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: muchun.song, Muchun Song, Ming Lei, Jens Axboe
Supposing the following scenario with a virtio_blk driver.
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
__blk_mq_issue_directly()
q->mq_ops->queue_rq()
virtio_queue_rq()
blk_mq_stop_hw_queue()
virtblk_done()
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped())
blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_run_hw_queue() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_insert_request()
return
After CPU0 has marked the queue as stopped, CPU1 will see the queue is
stopped. But before CPU1 puts the request on the dispatch list, CPU2
receives the interrupt of completion of request, so it will run the
hardware queue and marks the queue as non-stopped. Meanwhile, CPU1 also
runs the same hardware queue. After both CPU1 and CPU2 complete
blk_mq_run_hw_queue(), CPU1 just puts the request to the same hardware
queue and returns. It misses dispatching a request. Fix it by running
the hardware queue explicitly. And blk_mq_request_issue_directly()
should handle a similar situation. Fix it as well.
Fixes: d964f04a8fde ("blk-mq: fix direct issue")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241014092934.53630-2-songmuchun@bytedance.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
block/blk-mq.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 46cb802cfcf05..a15c665a77100 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -2048,7 +2048,6 @@ static blk_status_t __blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
* and avoid driver to try to dispatch again.
*/
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) || blk_queue_quiesced(q)) {
- run_queue = false;
bypass_insert = false;
goto insert;
}
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2025-03-17 3:30 ` [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced Muchun Song
@ 2025-03-17 6:56 ` Greg KH
2025-03-17 16:39 ` Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2025-03-17 6:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Muchun Song; +Cc: stable, muchun.song, Ming Lei, Jens Axboe
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 11:30:39AM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> Supposing the following scenario with a virtio_blk driver.
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
>
> blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
> __blk_mq_issue_directly()
> q->mq_ops->queue_rq()
> virtio_queue_rq()
> blk_mq_stop_hw_queue()
> virtblk_done()
> blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
> if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped())
> blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
> blk_mq_run_hw_queue() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
> blk_mq_insert_request()
> return
>
> After CPU0 has marked the queue as stopped, CPU1 will see the queue is
> stopped. But before CPU1 puts the request on the dispatch list, CPU2
> receives the interrupt of completion of request, so it will run the
> hardware queue and marks the queue as non-stopped. Meanwhile, CPU1 also
> runs the same hardware queue. After both CPU1 and CPU2 complete
> blk_mq_run_hw_queue(), CPU1 just puts the request to the same hardware
> queue and returns. It misses dispatching a request. Fix it by running
> the hardware queue explicitly. And blk_mq_request_issue_directly()
> should handle a similar situation. Fix it as well.
>
> Fixes: d964f04a8fde ("blk-mq: fix direct issue")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241014092934.53630-2-songmuchun@bytedance.com
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> ---
> block/blk-mq.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 46cb802cfcf05..a15c665a77100 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -2048,7 +2048,6 @@ static blk_status_t __blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
> * and avoid driver to try to dispatch again.
> */
> if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) || blk_queue_quiesced(q)) {
> - run_queue = false;
> bypass_insert = false;
> goto insert;
> }
> --
> 2.20.1
>
>
<formletter>
This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
stable kernel tree. Please read:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
for how to do this properly.
</formletter>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2024-12-03 10:10 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree gregkh
2025-03-17 3:30 ` [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced Muchun Song
@ 2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
2025-03-17 16:40 ` Sasha Levin
2025-04-22 12:20 ` Greg KH
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Muchun Song @ 2025-03-17 7:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: muchun.song, Muchun Song, Ming Lei, Jens Axboe
Supposing the following scenario with a virtio_blk driver.
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
__blk_mq_issue_directly()
q->mq_ops->queue_rq()
virtio_queue_rq()
blk_mq_stop_hw_queue()
virtblk_done()
blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped())
blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_run_hw_queue() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
blk_mq_insert_request()
return
After CPU0 has marked the queue as stopped, CPU1 will see the queue is
stopped. But before CPU1 puts the request on the dispatch list, CPU2
receives the interrupt of completion of request, so it will run the
hardware queue and marks the queue as non-stopped. Meanwhile, CPU1 also
runs the same hardware queue. After both CPU1 and CPU2 complete
blk_mq_run_hw_queue(), CPU1 just puts the request to the same hardware
queue and returns. It misses dispatching a request. Fix it by running
the hardware queue explicitly. And blk_mq_request_issue_directly()
should handle a similar situation. Fix it as well.
Fixes: d964f04a8fde ("blk-mq: fix direct issue")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241014092934.53630-2-songmuchun@bytedance.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
(cherry picked from commit 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d)
---
block/blk-mq.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 46cb802cfcf05..a15c665a77100 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -2048,7 +2048,6 @@ static blk_status_t __blk_mq_try_issue_directly(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
* and avoid driver to try to dispatch again.
*/
if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped(hctx) || blk_queue_quiesced(q)) {
- run_queue = false;
bypass_insert = false;
goto insert;
}
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2025-03-17 3:30 ` [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced Muchun Song
2025-03-17 6:56 ` Greg KH
@ 2025-03-17 16:39 ` Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2025-03-17 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable, songmuchun; +Cc: Sasha Levin
[ Sasha's backport helper bot ]
Hi,
Summary of potential issues:
⚠️ Found matching upstream commit but patch is missing proper reference to it
Found matching upstream commit: 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d
Status in newer kernel trees:
6.13.y | Present (exact SHA1)
6.12.y | Present (different SHA1: 8b25c0a165dd)
6.6.y | Present (different SHA1: fe0d9800ead6)
6.1.y | Not found
Note: The patch differs from the upstream commit:
---
1: 2003ee8a9aa14 < -: ------------- block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
-: ------------- > 1: ee890aaab4d74 block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
---
Results of testing on various branches:
| Branch | Patch Apply | Build Test |
|---------------------------|-------------|------------|
| stable/linux-5.15.y | Success | Success |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
@ 2025-03-17 16:40 ` Sasha Levin
2025-04-22 12:20 ` Greg KH
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2025-03-17 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable, songmuchun; +Cc: Sasha Levin
[ Sasha's backport helper bot ]
Hi,
Summary of potential issues:
⚠️ Found matching upstream commit but patch is missing proper reference to it
Found matching upstream commit: 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d
Status in newer kernel trees:
6.13.y | Present (exact SHA1)
6.12.y | Present (different SHA1: 8b25c0a165dd)
6.6.y | Present (different SHA1: fe0d9800ead6)
6.1.y | Not found
Note: The patch differs from the upstream commit:
---
1: 2003ee8a9aa14 < -: ------------- block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
-: ------------- > 1: 78009b03feb87 block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
---
Results of testing on various branches:
| Branch | Patch Apply | Build Test |
|---------------------------|-------------|------------|
| stable/linux-5.15.y | Success | Success |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
2025-03-17 16:40 ` Sasha Levin
@ 2025-04-22 12:20 ` Greg KH
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2025-04-22 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Muchun Song; +Cc: stable, muchun.song, Ming Lei, Jens Axboe
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 03:18:21PM +0800, Muchun Song wrote:
> Supposing the following scenario with a virtio_blk driver.
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
>
> blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
> __blk_mq_issue_directly()
> q->mq_ops->queue_rq()
> virtio_queue_rq()
> blk_mq_stop_hw_queue()
> virtblk_done()
> blk_mq_try_issue_directly()
> if (blk_mq_hctx_stopped())
> blk_mq_request_bypass_insert() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
> blk_mq_run_hw_queue() blk_mq_run_hw_queue()
> blk_mq_insert_request()
> return
>
> After CPU0 has marked the queue as stopped, CPU1 will see the queue is
> stopped. But before CPU1 puts the request on the dispatch list, CPU2
> receives the interrupt of completion of request, so it will run the
> hardware queue and marks the queue as non-stopped. Meanwhile, CPU1 also
> runs the same hardware queue. After both CPU1 and CPU2 complete
> blk_mq_run_hw_queue(), CPU1 just puts the request to the same hardware
> queue and returns. It misses dispatching a request. Fix it by running
> the hardware queue explicitly. And blk_mq_request_issue_directly()
> should handle a similar situation. Fix it as well.
>
> Fixes: d964f04a8fde ("blk-mq: fix direct issue")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241014092934.53630-2-songmuchun@bytedance.com
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> (cherry picked from commit 2003ee8a9aa14d766b06088156978d53c2e9be3d)
This was NOT a clean cherry-pick, always document what you had to do
differently from the original change please.
Please fix this up and resend a new version.
thanks,
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-04-22 12:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-12-03 10:10 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree gregkh
2025-03-17 3:30 ` [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced Muchun Song
2025-03-17 6:56 ` Greg KH
2025-03-17 16:39 ` Sasha Levin
2025-03-17 7:18 ` Muchun Song
2025-03-17 16:40 ` Sasha Levin
2025-04-22 12:20 ` Greg KH
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox