mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: daejun7.park@samsung.com, ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
	"beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	"stanley.chu@mediatek.com" <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
	"cang@codeaurora.org" <cang@codeaurora.org>,
	"tomas.winkler@intel.com" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Sang-yoon Oh <sangyoon.oh@samsung.com>,
	Sung-Jun Park <sungjun07.park@samsung.com>,
	yongmyung lee <ymhungry.lee@samsung.com>,
	Jinyoung CHOI <j-young.choi@samsung.com>,
	Adel Choi <adel.choi@samsung.com>,
	BoRam Shin <boram.shin@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:16:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0389f9cf-fea8-9990-7699-0e4322728e4a@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <963815509.21591323002276.JavaMail.epsvc@epcpadp1>

On 2020-06-04 18:56, Daejun Park wrote:
> +static struct ufshpb_req *ufshpb_get_map_req(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb,
> +					     struct ufshpb_subregion *srgn)
> +{
> +	struct ufshpb_req *map_req;
> +	struct request *req;
> +	struct bio *bio;
> +
> +	map_req = kmem_cache_alloc(hpb->map_req_cache, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!map_req)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	req = blk_get_request(hpb->sdev_ufs_lu->request_queue,
> +			      REQ_OP_SCSI_IN, BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT);
> +	if (IS_ERR(req))
> +		goto free_map_req;
> +
> +	bio = bio_alloc(GFP_KERNEL, hpb->pages_per_srgn);
> +	if (!bio) {
> +		blk_put_request(req);
> +		goto free_map_req;
> +	}
> +
> +	map_req->hpb = hpb;
> +	map_req->req = req;
> +	map_req->bio = bio;
> +
> +	map_req->rgn_idx = srgn->rgn_idx;
> +	map_req->srgn_idx = srgn->srgn_idx;
> +	map_req->mctx = srgn->mctx;
> +	map_req->lun = hpb->lun;
> +
> +	return map_req;
> +free_map_req:
> +	kmem_cache_free(hpb->map_req_cache, map_req);
> +	return NULL;
> +}

Will blk_get_request() fail if all tags have been allocated? Can that
cause a deadlock or infinite loop?

> +static inline void ufshpb_set_read_buf_cmd(unsigned char *cdb, int rgn_idx,
> +					   int srgn_idx, int srgn_mem_size)
> +{
> +	cdb[0] = UFSHPB_READ_BUFFER;
> +	cdb[1] = UFSHPB_READ_BUFFER_ID;
> +
> +	put_unaligned_be32(srgn_mem_size, &cdb[5]);
> +	/* cdb[5] = 0x00; */
> +	put_unaligned_be16(rgn_idx, &cdb[2]);
> +	put_unaligned_be16(srgn_idx, &cdb[4]);
> +
> +	cdb[9] = 0x00;
> +}

So the put_unaligned_be32(srgn_mem_size, &cdb[5]) comes first because
the put_unaligned_be16(srgn_idx, &cdb[4]) overwrites byte cdb[5]? That
is really ugly. Please use put_unaligned_be24() instead if that is what
you meant and keep the put_*() calls in increasing cdb offset order.

> +static int ufshpb_map_req_add_bio_page(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb,
> +				       struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio,
> +				       struct ufshpb_map_ctx *mctx)
> +{
> +	int i, ret = 0;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < hpb->pages_per_srgn; i++) {
> +		ret = bio_add_pc_page(q, bio, mctx->m_page[i], PAGE_SIZE, 0);
> +		if (ret != PAGE_SIZE) {
> +			dev_notice(&hpb->hpb_lu_dev,
> +				   "bio_add_pc_page fail %d\n", ret);
> +			return -ENOMEM;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

Why bio_add_pc_page() instead of bio_add_page()?

> +static int ufshpb_execute_map_req(struct ufshpb_lu *hpb,
> +				  struct ufshpb_req *map_req)
> +{
> +	struct request_queue *q;
> +	struct request *req;
> +	struct scsi_request *rq;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	q = hpb->sdev_ufs_lu->request_queue;
> +	ret = ufshpb_map_req_add_bio_page(hpb, q, map_req->bio,
> +					  map_req->mctx);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_notice(&hpb->hpb_lu_dev,
> +			   "map_req_add_bio_page fail %d - %d\n",
> +			   map_req->rgn_idx, map_req->srgn_idx);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	req = map_req->req;
> +
> +	blk_rq_append_bio(req, &map_req->bio);
> +	req->rq_flags |= RQF_QUIET;
> +	req->timeout = MAP_REQ_TIMEOUT;
> +	req->end_io_data = (void *)map_req;
> +
> +	rq = scsi_req(req);
> +	ufshpb_set_read_buf_cmd(rq->cmd, map_req->rgn_idx,
> +				map_req->srgn_idx, hpb->srgn_mem_size);
> +	rq->cmd_len = HPB_READ_BUFFER_CMD_LENGTH;
> +
> +	blk_execute_rq_nowait(q, NULL, req, 1, ufshpb_map_req_compl_fn);
> +
> +	atomic_inc(&hpb->stats.map_req_cnt);
> +	return 0;
> +}

Why RQF_QUIET?

Why a custom timeout instead of the SCSI LUN timeout?

Can this function be made asynchronous such that it does not have to be
executed on the context of a workqueue?

Thanks,

Bart.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-06-11  1:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p8>
2020-06-05  1:16 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] scsi: ufs: Add Host Performance Booster Support Daejun Park
2020-06-06 12:02   ` Avri Altman
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p1>
2020-06-05  1:30     ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS-feature layer Daejun Park
2020-06-10  4:15       ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-11  1:39       ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-09  0:51     ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS feature related parameter Daejun Park
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p2>
2020-06-05  1:56     ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read Daejun Park
2020-06-06 18:26       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  1:15         ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-11  1:16       ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2020-06-05  2:12     ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] scsi: ufs: Prepare HPB read for cached sub-region Daejun Park
2020-06-06 18:38       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  1:23         ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-11  1:37       ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-11  6:43         ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  0:53     ` Daejun Park
2020-06-10  3:51     ` RE: [RFC PATCH 4/5] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read Daejun Park
2020-06-10  9:50   ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] scsi: ufs: Add Host Performance Booster Support Bean Huo
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p4>
2020-06-09  0:49     ` Daejun Park
2020-06-09  7:00       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  0:52     ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read Daejun Park
2020-06-09  6:39       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  6:48       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-12  2:25     ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] scsi: ufs: Introduce HPB module Daejun Park
2020-06-12  2:27     ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS-feature layer Daejun Park
2020-06-12  4:28       ` Bart Van Assche
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p5>
2020-06-05  1:22     ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] scsi: ufs: Add UFS feature related parameter Daejun Park
2020-06-06 12:11       ` Avri Altman
2020-06-10  2:49     ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] scsi: ufs: L2P map management for HPB read Daejun Park
2020-06-12  3:37     ` Daejun Park
2020-06-13 15:24       ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-05  1:38 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] scsi: ufs: Introduce HPB module Daejun Park
2020-06-06 14:58   ` Avri Altman
2020-06-07  7:06   ` Avri Altman
2020-06-10  4:29   ` Bart Van Assche
2020-06-10  9:57     ` Bean Huo
     [not found]   ` <CGME20200605011604epcms2p8bec8ef6682583d7248dc7d9dc1bfc882@epcms2p6>
2020-06-12  2:29     ` Daejun Park
2020-06-09  0:52 ` Daejun Park
2020-06-09  6:51   ` Avri Altman
2020-06-09  0:53 ` Daejun Park
2020-06-12  3:39 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] scsi: ufs: Prepare HPB read for cached sub-region Daejun Park

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0389f9cf-fea8-9990-7699-0e4322728e4a@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=adel.choi@samsung.com \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=asutoshd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
    --cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
    --cc=boram.shin@samsung.com \
    --cc=cang@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=daejun7.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=j-young.choi@samsung.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=sangyoon.oh@samsung.com \
    --cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=sungjun07.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=tomas.winkler@intel.com \
    --cc=ymhungry.lee@samsung.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®