[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cc93effe-8e97-d4a8-851e-33208cf837a7@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:40:29 +0800
From: "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, martin.petersen@...cle.com, keith.busch@...el.com,
josef@...icpanda.com, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] nvme: use __blk_mq_complete_request in timeout path
On 06/25/2018 02:07 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>
>> Hi Christoph
>>
>> Thanks for your kindly response.
>>
>> On 06/20/2018 10:39 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>>>> index 73a97fc..2a161f6 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/pci.c
>>>> @@ -1203,6 +1203,7 @@ static enum blk_eh_timer_return nvme_timeout(struct request *req, bool reserved)
>>>> nvme_warn_reset(dev, csts);
>>>> nvme_dev_disable(dev, false);
>>>> nvme_reset_ctrl(&dev->ctrl);
>>>> + __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
>>>> return BLK_EH_DONE;
>>>> }
>>>> @@ -1213,6 +1214,11 @@ static enum blk_eh_timer_return nvme_timeout(struct request *req, bool reserved)
>>>> dev_warn(dev->ctrl.device,
>>>> "I/O %d QID %d timeout, completion polled\n",
>>>> req->tag, nvmeq->qid);
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * nvme_end_request will invoke blk_mq_complete_request,
>>>> + * it will do nothing for this timed out request.
>>>> + */
>>>> + __blk_mq_complete_request(req);
>>>
>>> And this clearly is bogus. We want to iterate over the tagetset
>>> and cancel all requests, not do that manually here.
>>>
>>> That was the whole point of the original change.
>>>
>>
>> For nvme-pci, we indeed have an issue that when nvme_reset_work->nvme_dev_disable returns, timeout path maybe still
>> running and the nvme_dev_disable invoked by timeout path will race with the nvme_reset_work.
>> However, the hole is still there right now w/o my changes, but just narrower.
>
> Given the amount of fixes (and fixes of fixes) we had in the timeout handler, maybe it'd be a good idea to step back and take a another look?
>
> Won't it be better to avoid disabling the device and return
> BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER if we are not aborting in the timeout handler?
>
Yes, that would be an ideal status for nvme-pci.
But we have to depend on the timeout handler to handle the timed out request from nvme_reset_work.
Thanks
Jianchao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists