From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15.y] block: fix missing dispatching request when queue is started or unquiesced
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 14:20:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2025042244-knoll-defensive-0f43@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250317071821.22449-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com>
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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-22 12:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
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 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=2025042244-knoll-defensive-0f43@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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