linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 4/8] ublk_drv: requeue rqs with recovery feature enabled

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <19edc1a4-91ef-2384-2fc1-82f57303cc17@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:04:29 +0800
From:   Ziyang Zhang <ZiyangZhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, xiaoguang.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/8] ublk_drv: requeue rqs with recovery feature
 enabled

On 2022/9/22 08:28, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 05:58:45PM +0800, ZiyangZhang wrote:
>> With recovery feature enabled, in ublk_queue_rq or task work
>> (in exit_task_work or fallback wq), we requeue rqs instead of
>> ending(aborting) them. Besides, No matter recovery feature is enabled
>> or disabled, we schedule monitor_work immediately.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: ZiyangZhang <ZiyangZhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
>> index 3bdac4bdf46f..b940e490ebab 100644
>> --- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
>> @@ -655,6 +655,19 @@ static void ubq_complete_io_cmd(struct ublk_io *io, int res)
>>  
>>  #define UBLK_REQUEUE_DELAY_MS	3
>>  
>> +static inline void __ublk_abort_rq_in_task_work(struct ublk_queue *ubq,
>> +		struct request *rq)
>> +{
>> +	pr_devel("%s: %s q_id %d tag %d io_flags %x.\n", __func__,
>> +			(ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq)) ? "requeue" : "abort",
>> +			ubq->q_id, rq->tag, ubq->ios[rq->tag].flags);
>> +	/* We cannot process this rq so just requeue it. */
>> +	if (ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq))
>> +		blk_mq_requeue_request(rq, false);
>> +	else
>> +		blk_mq_end_request(rq, BLK_STS_IOERR);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static inline void __ublk_rq_task_work(struct request *req)
>>  {
>>  	struct ublk_queue *ubq = req->mq_hctx->driver_data;
>> @@ -677,7 +690,7 @@ static inline void __ublk_rq_task_work(struct request *req)
>>  	 * (2) current->flags & PF_EXITING.
>>  	 */
>>  	if (unlikely(current != ubq->ubq_daemon || current->flags & PF_EXITING)) {
>> -		blk_mq_end_request(req, BLK_STS_IOERR);
>> +		__ublk_abort_rq_in_task_work(ubq, req);
>>  		mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &ub->monitor_work, 0);
>>  		return;
>>  	}
>> @@ -752,6 +765,20 @@ static void ublk_rq_task_work_fn(struct callback_head *work)
>>  	__ublk_rq_task_work(req);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline blk_status_t __ublk_abort_rq(struct ublk_queue *ubq,
>> +		struct request *rq)
>> +{
>> +	pr_devel("%s: %s q_id %d tag %d io_flags %x.\n", __func__,
>> +			(ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq)) ? "requeue" : "abort",
>> +			ubq->q_id, rq->tag, ubq->ios[rq->tag].flags);
>> +	/* We cannot process this rq so just requeue it. */
>> +	if (ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq)) {
>> +		blk_mq_requeue_request(rq, false);
>> +		return BLK_STS_OK;
>> +	}
>> +	return BLK_STS_IOERR;
>> +}
>> +
> 
> Please remove the two added logging, otherwise this patch looks fine.

OK, will do so in V5.

Regards,
Zhang