lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] blk-mq: don't lose requests if a stopped queue restarts
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 01:56:42PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 05/04/2015 01:51 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 01:17:19PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>On 05/02/2015 06:31 PM, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >>>Normally if driver is busy to dispatch a request the logic is like below:
> >>>block layer: driver:
> >>> __blk_mq_run_hw_queue
> >>>a. blk_mq_stop_hw_queue
> >>>b. rq add to ctx->dispatch
> >>>
> >>>later:
> >>>1. blk_mq_start_hw_queue
> >>>2. __blk_mq_run_hw_queue
> >>>
> >>>But it's possible step 1-2 runs between a and b. And since rq isn't in
> >>>ctx->dispatch yet, step 2 will not run rq. The rq might get lost if
> >>>there are no subsequent requests kick in.
> >>
> >>Good catch! But the patch introduces a potentially never ending loop
> >>in __blk_mq_run_hw_queue(). Not sure how we can fully close it, but
> >>it might be better to punt the re-run after adding the requests back
> >>to the worker. That would turn a potential busy loop (until requests
> >>complete) into something with nicer behavior, at least. Ala
> >>
> >>if (!test_bit(BLK_MQ_S_STOPPED, &hctx->state))
> >> kblockd_schedule_delayed_work_on(blk_mq_hctx_next_cpu(hctx),
> >> &hctx->run_work, 0);
> >
> >My first version of the patch is like this, but I changed my mind later.
> >The assumption is driver will stop queue if it's busy to dispatch
> >request. If the driver is buggy, we will have the endless loop here.
> >Should we assume drivers will not do the right thing?
>
> There's really no contract that says the driver MUST stop the queue
> for busy. It could, legitimately, decide to just always run the
> queue when requests complete.
>
> It might be better to simply force this behavior. If we get a BUSY,
> stop the queue from __blk_mq_run_hw_queue(). And if the bit isn't
> still set on re-add, then we know we need to re-run it. I think that
> would be a cleaner API, less fragile, and harder to get wrong. The
> down side is that now this stop happens implicitly by the core, and
> the driver must now have an asymmetric queue start when it frees the
> limited resource that caused the BUSY return. Either that, or we
> define a 2nd set of start/stop bits, one used exclusively by the
> driver and one used exclusively by blk-mq. Then blk-mq could restart
> the queue on completion of a request, since it would then know that
> blk-mq was the one that stopped it.

Agree. I'll make the rerun async for now and leave above as a future
improvement.


From 3e767da0e9f1044659c605120e09726ffd1aeab0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id: <3e767da0e9f1044659c605120e09726ffd1aeab0.1430770649.git.shli@fb.com>
From: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 16:39:39 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] blk-mq: don't lose requests if a stopped queue restarts

Normally if driver is busy to dispatch a request the logic is like below:
block layer: driver:
__blk_mq_run_hw_queue
a. blk_mq_stop_hw_queue
b. rq add to ctx->dispatch

later:
1. blk_mq_start_hw_queue
2. __blk_mq_run_hw_queue

But it's possible step 1-2 runs between a and b. And since rq isn't in
ctx->dispatch yet, step 2 will not run rq. The rq might get lost if
there are no subsequent requests kick in.

Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>
---
block/blk-mq.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index ade8a2d..e1a5b9e 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -855,6 +855,16 @@ static void __blk_mq_run_hw_queue(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
spin_lock(&hctx->lock);
list_splice(&rq_list, &hctx->dispatch);
spin_unlock(&hctx->lock);
+ /*
+ * the queue is expected stopped with BLK_MQ_RQ_QUEUE_BUSY, but
+ * it's possible the queue is stopped and restarted again
+ * before this. Queue restart will dispatch requests. And since
+ * requests in rq_list aren't added into hctx->dispatch yet,
+ * the requests in rq_list might get lost.
+ *
+ * blk_mq_run_hw_queue() already checks the STOPPED bit
+ **/
+ blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);
}
}

--
1.8.1


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-04 23:01    [W:0.034 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site