Re: [PATCH 2/8] blk-mq: change the method of iterating busy tags of a request_queue

["jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com>]

Hi Sagi

Thanks for your kindly response.

On 3/21/19 2:52 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/15/19 1:57 AM, Jianchao Wang wrote:
>> tags->rqs[] will not been cleaned when free driver tag and there
>> is a window between get driver tag and write tags->rqs[], so we
>> may see stale rq in tags->rqs[] which may have been freed, as
>> following case,
>> blk_mq_get_request         blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter
>>    -> blk_mq_get_tag
>>                               -> bt_for_each
>>                                 -> bt_iter
>>                                   -> rq = taags->rqs[]
>>                                   -> rq->q
>>    -> blk_mq_rq_ctx_init
>>      -> data->hctx->tags->rqs[rq->tag] = rq;
>>
>> To fix this, the blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter is changed in this
>> patch to use tags->static_rqs[] instead of tags->rqs[]. We have
>> to identify whether there is a io scheduler attached to decide
>> to use hctx->tags or hctx->sched_tags. And we will try to get a
>> non-zero q_usage_counter before that, so it is safe to access
>> them. Add 'inflight' parameter to determine to iterate in-flight
>> requests or just busy tags. A correction here is that
>> part_in_flight should count the busy tags instead of rqs that
>> have got driver tags.
> 
> IMO, instead of this parameter, add a wrapper like
> blk_mq_queue_tag_inflight_iter() or keep the parameter out until
> we actually have a user that calls it for busy and not inflight.

Using a wrapper instead of exporting the parameter to user is indeed better.
I will change it in next version.

When the 'inflight' parameter is true, we iterate the inflight requests,
otherwise, we iterate the all the busy requests no matter they are in-flight
or not. The latter would be useful for part_in_flight. Currently, we only
account the requests with driver tags, it is inconsistent for the io-scheduler
and non-io-scheduler case.

> 
> Other than that, I think that iterating over static_rqs is a good
> solution to the problem described.
> 

Sincerely
Jianchao