lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] blk-mq: Fix blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter() for shared tags
From
Date
On 18/10/2021 10:07, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 09:08:57AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 13/10/2021 16:13, John Garry wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>>>> index 72a2724a4eee..2a2ad6dfcc33 100644
>>>> --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>>>> +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
>>>> @@ -232,8 +232,9 @@ static bool bt_iter(struct sbitmap *bitmap,
>>>> unsigned int bitnr, void *data)
>>>>       if (!rq)
>>>>           return true;
>>>> -    if (rq->q == hctx->queue && rq->mq_hctx == hctx)
>>>> -        ret = iter_data->fn(hctx, rq, iter_data->data, reserved);
>>>> +    if (rq->q == hctx->queue && (rq->mq_hctx == hctx ||
>>>> +                blk_mq_is_shared_tags(hctx->flags)))
>>>> +        ret = iter_data->fn(rq->mq_hctx, rq, iter_data->data, reserved);
>>>>       blk_mq_put_rq_ref(rq);
>>>>       return ret;
>>>>   }
>>>> @@ -460,6 +461,9 @@ void blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter(struct
>>>> request_queue *q, busy_iter_fn *fn,
>>>>           if (tags->nr_reserved_tags)
>>>>               bt_for_each(hctx, &tags->breserved_tags, fn, priv, true);
>>>>           bt_for_each(hctx, &tags->bitmap_tags, fn, priv, false);
>>>> +
>>>> +        if (blk_mq_is_shared_tags(hctx->flags))
>>>> +            break;
>>>>       }
>>>>       blk_queue_exit(q);
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>> I suppose that is ok, and means that we iter once.
>>>
>>> However, I have to ask, where is the big user of
>>> blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() coming from? I saw this from Kashyap's
>>> mail:
>>>
>>> > 1.31%     1.31%  kworker/57:1H-k  [kernel.vmlinux]
>>> >       native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
>>> >       ret_from_fork
>>> >       kthread
>>> >       worker_thread
>>> >       process_one_work
>>> >       blk_mq_timeout_work
>>> >       blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter
>>> >       bt_iter
>>> >       blk_mq_find_and_get_req
>>> >       _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
>>> >       native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
>>>
>>> How or why blk_mq_timeout_work()?
>> Just some update: I tried hisi_sas with 10x SAS SSDs, megaraid sas with 1x
>> SATA HDD (that's all I have), and null blk with lots of devices, and I still
>> can't see high usage of blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter().
> It should be triggered easily in case of heavy io accounting:
>
> while true; do cat /proc/diskstats; done
>

Let me check that.

>
>> So how about we get this patch processed (to fix blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter()),
>> as it is independent of blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter()? And then wait for some
>> update or some more info from Kashyap regarding blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter()
> Looks fine:
>
> Reviewed-by: Ming Lei<ming.lei@redhat.com>

Thanks, I'll just send a v2 with your tag for clarity, as there has been
much discussion here.

John

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-18 11:31    [W:1.177 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site