[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZDBvTS1j26d3392/@kbusch-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2023 13:30:21 -0600
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
To: Lei Lei2 Yin <yinlei2@...ovo.com>
Cc: "axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>, "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"cybeyond@...mail.com" <cybeyond@...mail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: fix double blk_mq_complete_request for timeout
request with low probability
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 04:18:18PM +0000, Lei Lei2 Yin wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> index 53ef028596c6..c1cc384f4f3e 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> @@ -450,8 +450,8 @@ bool nvme_cancel_request(struct request *req, void *data)
> dev_dbg_ratelimited(((struct nvme_ctrl *) data)->device,
> "Cancelling I/O %d", req->tag);
>
> - /* don't abort one completed request */
> - if (blk_mq_request_completed(req))
> + /* don't abort one completed or idle request */
> + if (blk_mq_rq_state(req) != MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT)
> return true;
I was suspicious about this path too, and had the same change long ago, but
shelved it when I couldn't produce any errors there. But the change makes sense
to me!
Reviewed-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists