From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: __elv_next_request() shouldn't call into the elevator if bypassing
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:32:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140129213256.GF6403@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140129202633.GQ30842@htj.dyndns.org>
On Wed, Jan 29 2014, Tejun Heo wrote:
> request_queue bypassing is used to suppress higher-level function of a
> request_queue so that they can be switched, reconfigured and shut
> down. A request_queue does the followings while bypassing.
>
> * bypasses elevator and io_cq association and queues requests directly
> to the FIFO dispatch queue.
>
> * bypasses block cgroup request_list lookup and always uses the root
> request_list.
>
> Once confirmed to be bypassing, specific elevator and block cgroup
> policy implementations can assume that nothing is in flight for them
> and perform various operations which would be dangerous otherwise.
>
> Such confirmation is acheived by short-circuiting all new requests
> directly to the dispatch queue and waiting for all the requests which
> were issued before to finish. Unfortunately, while the request
> allocating and draining sides were properly handled, we forgot to
> actually plug the request dispatch path. Even after bypassing mode is
> confirmed, if the attached driver tries to fetch a request and the
> dispatch queue is empty, __elv_next_request() would invoke the current
> elevator's elevator_dispatch_fn() callback. As all in-flight requests
> were drained, the elevator wouldn't contain any request but once
> bypass is confirmed we don't even know whether the elevator is even
> there. It might be in the process of being switched and half torn
> down.
>
> Frank Mayhar reports that this actually happened while switching
> elevators, leading to an oops.
>
> Let's fix it by making __elv_next_request() avoid invoking the
> elevator_dispatch_fn() callback if the queue is bypassing. It already
> avoids invoking the callback if the queue is dying. As a dying queue
> is guaranteed to be bypassing, we can simply replace blk_queue_dying()
> check with blk_queue_bypass().
Thanks Tejun, will queue up right after Linus has merged the previous
requests. And will add Franks tested-by.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-29 21:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-29 20:26 Tejun Heo
2014-01-29 21:23 ` Frank Mayhar
2014-01-29 21:32 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=20140129213256.GF6403@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=fmayhar@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome