On 01/20/2018 10:07 PM, jianchao.wang wrote:
> Hi Keith
>
> Thanks for you kindly response.
>
> On 01/20/2018 10:11 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 09:56:48PM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>> In nvme_dev_disable, the outstanding requests will be requeued finally.
>>> I'm afraid the requests requeued on the q->requeue_list will be blocked
>>> until another requeue
>>> occurs, if we cancel the requeue work before it get scheduled.
>>
>> We should kick the request list in nvme_start_queues.
>>
> Yes
>
> @@ -3513,8 +3513,10 @@ void nvme_start_queues(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl)
> struct nvme_ns *ns;
>
> mutex_lock(&ctrl->namespaces_mutex);
> - list_for_each_entry(ns, &ctrl->namespaces, list)
> + list_for_each_entry(ns, &ctrl->namespaces, list) {
> blk_mq_unquiesce_queue(ns->queue);
> + blk_mq_kick_requeue_list(ns->queue);
> + }
> mutex_unlock(&ctrl->namespaces_mutex);
> }
We have to also add blk_mq_kick_requeue_list in nvme_kill_queues in case of
queue_count < 2.
>
> Then, nvme_sync_queues could be more universal.
>
> Many thanks for your directive.
>
> Jianchao
>
