On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 15:16 -0700, t...@kernel.org wrote:
> AFAIK,
> there's one non-critical race condition which has always been there.
> We have a larger race window for that case but don't yet know whether
> that's problematic or not. If that actually is problematic, we can
> figure out a way
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 10:09:18PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Please elaborate what your long-term goal is for the blk-mq timeout handler.
Hmm... I don't really have any plans beyond what's been posted.
> The legacy block layer suspends request state changes while a timeout is
> bein
On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 15:01 -0700, t...@kernel.org wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:56:41PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > This patch increases the time during which .aborted_gstate == .gstate if the
> > timeout is reset. Does that increase the chance that a completion will be
> > missed
> >
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:56:41PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> This patch increases the time during which .aborted_gstate == .gstate if the
> timeout is reset. Does that increase the chance that a completion will be
> missed
> if the request timeout is reset?
It sure does, but we're c
On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 14:10 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 02:08:37PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 04/02/18 12:01, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > + * As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> > > + * ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored completions
> >
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 09:31:34PM +, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > +* As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> > > > +* ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored completions
> > > > +* and further spurious timeouts.
> > > > +*/
> >
On Mon, 2018-04-02 at 14:10 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 02:08:37PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On 04/02/18 12:01, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > + * As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> > > + * ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored completions
> >
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 02:08:37PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 04/02/18 12:01, Tejun Heo wrote:
> >+ * As nothing prevents from completion happening while
> >+ * ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored completions
> >+ * and further spurious timeouts.
> >+ */
> >+
On 04/02/18 12:01, Tejun Heo wrote:
+* As nothing prevents from completion happening while
+* ->aborted_gstate is set, this may lead to ignored completions
+* and further spurious timeouts.
+*/
+ if (rq->rq_flags & RQF_MQ_TIMEOUT_RESET)
+ blk_mq
When a request is handed over from normal execution to timeout, we
synchronize using ->aborted_gstate and RCU grace periods; however,
when a request is being returned from timeout handling to normal
execution for BLK_EH_RESET_TIMER, we were skipping the same
synchronization.
This means that it the
10 matches
Mail list logo
