[dm-devel] [PATCH v5] blk-mq: introduce BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE

Mike Snitzer snitzer at redhat.com
Wed Jan 31 03:07:26 UTC 2018


On Tue, Jan 30 2018 at  9:44P -0500,
Jens Axboe <axboe at kernel.dk> wrote:

> On 1/30/18 7:24 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > From: Ming Lei <ming.lei at redhat.com>
> > 
> > This status is returned from driver to block layer if device related
> > resource is unavailable, but driver can guarantee that IO dispatch
> > will be triggered in future when the resource is available.
> > 
> > Convert some drivers to return BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE.  Also, if driver
> > returns BLK_STS_RESOURCE and SCHED_RESTART is set, rerun queue after
> > a delay (BLK_MQ_DELAY_QUEUE) to avoid IO stalls.  BLK_MQ_DELAY_QUEUE is
> > 3 ms because both scsi-mq and nvmefc are using that magic value.
> > 
> > If a driver can make sure there is in-flight IO, it is safe to return
> > BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE because:
> > 
> > 1) If all in-flight IOs complete before examining SCHED_RESTART in
> > blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list(), SCHED_RESTART must be cleared, so queue
> > is run immediately in this case by blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list();
> > 
> > 2) if there is any in-flight IO after/when examining SCHED_RESTART
> > in blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list():
> > - if SCHED_RESTART isn't set, queue is run immediately as handled in 1)
> > - otherwise, this request will be dispatched after any in-flight IO is
> >   completed via blk_mq_sched_restart()
> > 
> > 3) if SCHED_RESTART is set concurently in context because of
> > BLK_STS_RESOURCE, blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue() will cover the above two
> > cases and make sure IO hang can be avoided.
> > 
> > One invariant is that queue will be rerun if SCHED_RESTART is set.
> 
> This looks pretty good to me. I'm waffling a bit on whether to retain
> the current BLK_STS_RESOURCE behavior and name the new one something
> else, but I do like using the DEV name in there to signify the
> difference between a global and device resource.
> 
> Just a few small nits below - can you roll a v6 with the changes?

Folded in all your feedback and just replied with v6.

> > diff --git a/include/linux/blk_types.h b/include/linux/blk_types.h
> > index 2d973ac54b09..f41d2057215f 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/blk_types.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/blk_types.h
> > @@ -39,6 +39,23 @@ typedef u8 __bitwise blk_status_t;
> >  
> >  #define BLK_STS_AGAIN		((__force blk_status_t)12)
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE is returned from driver to block layer if device
> > + * related resource is unavailable, but driver can guarantee that queue
> > + * will be rerun in future once the resource is available (whereby
> > + * dispatching requests).
> > + *
> > + * To safely return BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE, and allow forward progress, a
> > + * driver just needs to make sure there is in-flight IO.
> > + *
> > + * Difference with BLK_STS_RESOURCE:
> > + * If driver isn't sure if the queue will be rerun once device resource
> > + * is made available, please return BLK_STS_RESOURCE.  For example: when
> > + * memory allocation, DMA Mapping or other system resource allocation
> > + * fails and IO can't be submitted to device.
> > + */
> > +#define BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE	((__force blk_status_t)13)
> 
> I'd rephrase that as:
> 
> BLK_STS_DEV_RESOURCE is returned from the driver to the block layer if
> device related resource are unavailable, but the driver can guarantee
> that the queue will be rerun in the future once resources become
> available again. This is typically the case for device specific
> resources that are consumed for IO. If the driver fails allocating these
> resources, we know that inflight (or pending) IO will free these
> resource upon completion.
> 
> This is different from BLK_STS_RESOURCE in that it explicitly references
> device specific resource. For resources of wider scope, allocation
> failure can happen without having pending IO. This means that we can't
> rely on request completions freeing these resources, as IO may not be in
> flight. Examples of that are kernel memory allocations, DMA mappings, or
> any other system wide resources.

Thanks for that, definitely clearer, nice job.

Mike




More information about the dm-devel mailing list