lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Sep]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V4 4/8] ublk_drv: requeue rqs with recovery feature enabled
From
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@linux.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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-09-22 04:05    [W:0.052 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site