lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Problems with the block-layer timeouts
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> I spent most of the day yesterday debugging some tricky problems in the
> new block-layer timeout scheme. Clearly it is in need of more work.
>
> A major reason for these problems was that there doesn't seem to be a
> clear a idea of when the timeout period should begin. In
> blk_add_timer() a comment says:

> How should this be fixed? It would help to call scsi_dev_queue_ready()
> before elv_next_request(), but that's not sufficient.
> scsi_times_out() needs to recognize that a timeout for a non-running
> request can be handled by directly returning BLK_EH_HANDLED. Right?
>
>

Tejun described a similar issue here.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/35603

And a fix to address the issue here.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ide/35725

Does the patch posted by Tejun address your issue?

> While I'm on the subject, there are a few related items that could be
> improved. In my tests, I was generating I/O requests simply by doing
>
> dd if=/dev/sda ...
>
> I don't know where the timeouts for these requests are determined, but
> they were set to 60 seconds. That seems much too long.
>

It is set by a udev rule and the value is historical.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.scsi/45631/focus=45646


-andmike
--
Michael Anderson
andmike@linux.vnet.ibm.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-02 21:39    [W:0.148 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site