On 01/13/2018 05:19 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Sorry but I only retrieved the blk-mq debugfs several minutes after the hang
> started so I'm not sure the state information is relevant. Anyway, I have
> attached
> it to this e-mail. The most remarkable part is the following:
>
>
Hi tejun
Many thanks for your kindly response.
On 01/09/2018 11:37 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:08:04AM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>> But what'd prevent the completion reinitializing the request and then
>>> the actual completion pa
Hi tejun
Many thanks for you kindly response.
On 01/09/2018 01:27 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Jianchao.
>
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 12:02:20PM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:56:49AM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>>>
Sorry for my non-detailed description.
On 12/21/2017 09:50 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:56:49AM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>> It's worrying that even though the blk_mark_rq_complete() here is intended
>> to synchronize with
>> timeo
gned-off-by: Tejun Heo <t...@kernel.org>
> Cc: "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.w...@oracle.com>
> ---
> block/blk-mq.c | 18 --
> block/blk-timeout.c| 1 +
> include/linux/blkdev.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletion
