Hello everyone,
> Also, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY seems like an arbitrary magic number;
> maybe that value isn't working correctly anymore?
this is an excellent remark from Robert Elliot,
this gives me an idea : try to set manually a value in the if()
statement ( line 1779 in file /drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c )
by default the value of SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY is 3 ms, which might be
inapropriate with some slow harddisks and with the changes made by the
commit
74665016086615bbaa3fa6f83af410a0a4e029ee ( scsi: convert host_busy to
atomic_t ),
after further tests I discover that the value 40 ms solves my problem,
the bug is gone with this value,
here is the patch who sets 40 ms in the if() statement :
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2014-10-05 21:23:04.000000000 +0200
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c 2014-11-16 17:39:16.819674725 +0100
@@ -1776,7 +1776,7 @@ static void scsi_request_fn(struct reque
atomic_dec(&sdev->device_busy);
out_delay:
if (!atomic_read(&sdev->device_busy) && !scsi_device_blocked(sdev))
- blk_delay_queue(q, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY);
+ blk_delay_queue(q, 40);
}
static inline int prep_to_mq(int ret)
with this patch the value of SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY is still 3 ms, but here we
use 40 ms only in a specific part of scsi_lib.c file ( line 1779, it's
this part where the bug seems to be triggered, so that's why I set 40 ms
here in the blk_delay_queue() function )
after applying this patch I don't see problems related to I/O
performance/speed, all is ok,
the question is now : why putting a higher value in line 1779 does solve
the bug ?
and why before the commit 74665016086615bbaa3fa6f83af410a0a4e029ee I
don't have problems even with a value of 3 ms for SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY ?
Le 14/11/2014 08:32, Christoph Hellwig a écrit :
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:55:38PM +0100, Barto wrote:
>> it's interesting, with this commit
>> 74665016086615bbaa3fa6f83af410a0a4e029ee I have the bug :
>>
>> scsi: convert host_busy to atomic_t :
>
> At this point we'll need a bisction between v3.16 as the last good
> point, and 74665016086615bbaa3fa6f83af410a0a4e029ee as the known bad
> point.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
