From: Jared Holzman <jholzman@nvidia.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ming.lei@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, ushankar@purestorage.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jholzman@nvidia.com
Subject: [PATCH 6.14.y v2 6/7] ublk: simplify aborting ublk request
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 12:47:01 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250507094702.73459-7-jholzman@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250507094702.73459-1-jholzman@nvidia.com>
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
[ Upstream commit e63d2228ef831af36f963b3ab8604160cfff84c1 ]
Now ublk_abort_queue() is moved to ublk char device release handler,
meantime our request queue is "quiesced" because either ->canceling was
set from uring_cmd cancel function or all IOs are inflight and can't be
completed by ublk server, things becomes easy much:
- all uring_cmd are done, so we needn't to mark io as UBLK_IO_FLAG_ABORTED
for handling completion from uring_cmd
- ublk char device is closed, no one can hold IO request reference any more,
so we can simply complete this request or requeue it for ublk_nosrv_should_reissue_outstanding.
Reviewed-by: Uday Shankar <ushankar@purestorage.com>
Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250416035444.99569-8-ming.lei@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
---
drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 82 ++++++++++------------------------------
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
index c3f576a9dbf2..6000147ac2a5 100644
--- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
@@ -115,15 +115,6 @@ struct ublk_uring_cmd_pdu {
*/
#define UBLK_IO_FLAG_OWNED_BY_SRV 0x02
-/*
- * IO command is aborted, so this flag is set in case of
- * !UBLK_IO_FLAG_ACTIVE.
- *
- * After this flag is observed, any pending or new incoming request
- * associated with this io command will be failed immediately
- */
-#define UBLK_IO_FLAG_ABORTED 0x04
-
/*
* UBLK_IO_FLAG_NEED_GET_DATA is set because IO command requires
* get data buffer address from ublksrv.
@@ -1054,12 +1045,6 @@ static inline void __ublk_complete_rq(struct request *req)
unsigned int unmapped_bytes;
blk_status_t res = BLK_STS_OK;
- /* called from ublk_abort_queue() code path */
- if (io->flags & UBLK_IO_FLAG_ABORTED) {
- res = BLK_STS_IOERR;
- goto exit;
- }
-
/* failed read IO if nothing is read */
if (!io->res && req_op(req) == REQ_OP_READ)
io->res = -EIO;
@@ -1109,47 +1094,6 @@ static void ublk_complete_rq(struct kref *ref)
__ublk_complete_rq(req);
}
-static void ublk_do_fail_rq(struct request *req)
-{
- struct ublk_queue *ubq = req->mq_hctx->driver_data;
-
- if (ublk_nosrv_should_reissue_outstanding(ubq->dev))
- blk_mq_requeue_request(req, false);
- else
- __ublk_complete_rq(req);
-}
-
-static void ublk_fail_rq_fn(struct kref *ref)
-{
- struct ublk_rq_data *data = container_of(ref, struct ublk_rq_data,
- ref);
- struct request *req = blk_mq_rq_from_pdu(data);
-
- ublk_do_fail_rq(req);
-}
-
-/*
- * Since ublk_rq_task_work_cb always fails requests immediately during
- * exiting, __ublk_fail_req() is only called from abort context during
- * exiting. So lock is unnecessary.
- *
- * Also aborting may not be started yet, keep in mind that one failed
- * request may be issued by block layer again.
- */
-static void __ublk_fail_req(struct ublk_queue *ubq, struct ublk_io *io,
- struct request *req)
-{
- WARN_ON_ONCE(io->flags & UBLK_IO_FLAG_ACTIVE);
-
- if (ublk_need_req_ref(ubq)) {
- struct ublk_rq_data *data = blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(req);
-
- kref_put(&data->ref, ublk_fail_rq_fn);
- } else {
- ublk_do_fail_rq(req);
- }
-}
-
static void ubq_complete_io_cmd(struct ublk_io *io, int res,
unsigned issue_flags)
{
@@ -1639,10 +1583,26 @@ static void ublk_commit_completion(struct ublk_device *ub,
ublk_put_req_ref(ubq, req);
}
+static void __ublk_fail_req(struct ublk_queue *ubq, struct ublk_io *io,
+ struct request *req)
+{
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(io->flags & UBLK_IO_FLAG_ACTIVE);
+
+ if (ublk_nosrv_should_reissue_outstanding(ubq->dev))
+ blk_mq_requeue_request(req, false);
+ else {
+ io->res = -EIO;
+ __ublk_complete_rq(req);
+ }
+}
+
/*
- * Called from ubq_daemon context via cancel fn, meantime quiesce ublk
- * blk-mq queue, so we are called exclusively with blk-mq and ubq_daemon
- * context, so everything is serialized.
+ * Called from ublk char device release handler, when any uring_cmd is
+ * done, meantime request queue is "quiesced" since all inflight requests
+ * can't be completed because ublk server is dead.
+ *
+ * So no one can hold our request IO reference any more, simply ignore the
+ * reference, and complete the request immediately
*/
static void ublk_abort_queue(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
{
@@ -1659,10 +1619,8 @@ static void ublk_abort_queue(struct ublk_device *ub, struct ublk_queue *ubq)
* will do it
*/
rq = blk_mq_tag_to_rq(ub->tag_set.tags[ubq->q_id], i);
- if (rq && blk_mq_request_started(rq)) {
- io->flags |= UBLK_IO_FLAG_ABORTED;
+ if (rq && blk_mq_request_started(rq))
__ublk_fail_req(ubq, io, rq);
- }
}
}
}
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-07 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-07 9:46 [PATCH 6.14.y v2 0/7] ublk: fix race between io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task and ublk_cancel_cmd Jared Holzman
2025-05-07 9:46 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 1/7] ublk: add helper of ublk_need_map_io() Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:17 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:46 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 2/7] ublk: properly serialize all FETCH_REQs Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:18 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:46 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 3/7] ublk: move device reset into ublk_ch_release() Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:19 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:46 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 4/7] ublk: improve detection and handling of ublk server exit Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:19 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:47 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 5/7] ublk: remove __ublk_quiesce_dev() Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:17 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:47 ` Jared Holzman [this message]
2025-05-08 16:18 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 6/7] ublk: simplify aborting ublk request Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 9:47 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 7/7] ublk: fix race between io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task and ublk_cancel_cmd Jared Holzman
2025-05-08 16:17 ` Sasha Levin
2025-05-07 11:18 ` [PATCH 6.14.y v2 0/7] " Ming Lei
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=20250507094702.73459-7-jholzman@nvidia.com \
--to=jholzman@nvidia.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ushankar@purestorage.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