[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1513818046.2603.39.camel@wdc.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 01:00:47 +0000
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To: "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel-team@...com" <kernel-team@...com>,
"oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"osandov@...com" <osandov@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v2] blk-mq: reimplement timeout handling
On Wed, 2017-12-20 at 16:08 -0800, tj@...nel.org wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:41:02PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 11:01 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > Currently, blk-mq timeout path synchronizes against the usual
> > > issue/completion path using a complex scheme involving atomic
> > > bitflags, REQ_ATOM_*, memory barriers and subtle memory coherence
> > > rules. Unfortunatley, it contains quite a few holes.
> >
> > Hello Tejun,
> >
> > An attempt to run SCSI I/O with this patch series applied resulted in
> > the following:
>
> Can you please try the v3? There were a couple bugs that I missed
> while testing earlier versions.
>
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171216120726.517153-1-tj@kernel.org
Will do. But please Cc: linux-block in case you would post a v4 of this patch
series. I searched the linux-block folder of my mailbox for the latest version
of this patch series and that is how I ended up testing v2 instead of v3 ...
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists