From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
David Runge <dave@sleepmap.de>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:12:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102181238.GA17806@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201102095533.fxc2xpauzsoju7cm@linutronix.de>
On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 10:55:33AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2020-10-31 09:00:49 [-0600], Jens Axboe wrote:
> > There really aren't any rules for this, and it's perfectly legit to
> > complete from process context. Maybe you're a kthread driven driver and
> > that's how you handle completions. The block completion path has always
> > been hard IRQ safe, but possible to call from anywhere.
>
> I'm not trying to put restrictions and forbidding completions from a
> kthread. I'm trying to avoid the pointless softirq dance for no added
> value. We could:
> to not break that assumption you just mentioned and provide
> |static inline void blk_mq_complete_request_local(struct request *rq)
> |{
> | rq->q->mq_ops->complete(rq);
> |}
>
> so that completion issued from from process context (like those from
> usb-storage) don't end up waking `ksoftird' (running at SCHED_OTHER)
> completing the requests but rather performing it right away. The softirq
> dance makes no sense here.
Agreed. But I don't think your above blk_mq_complete_request_local
is all that useful either as ->complete is defined by the caller,
so we could just do a direct call. Basically we should just
return false from blk_mq_complete_request_remote after updating
the state when called from process context. But given that IIRC
we are not supposed to check what state we are called from
we'll need a helper just for updating the state instead and
ensure the driver uses the right helper. Now of course we might
have process context callers that still want to bounce to the
submitting CPU, but in that case we should go directly to a
workqueue or similar.
Either way doing this properly will probabl involve an audit of all
drivers, but I think that is worth it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-02 18:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20201021175059.GA4989@hmbx>
2020-10-23 11:04 ` [PATCH RFC] blk-mq: Don't IPI requests on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-23 11:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-23 13:52 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-27 9:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 10:11 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-27 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 17:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-10-27 17:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-27 17:59 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-27 20:58 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 6:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 14:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] blk-mq: Don't complete on a remote CPU in force threaded mode Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 14:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Always complete remote completions requests in softirq Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 14:12 ` [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 14:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-28 14:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-29 13:12 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-29 14:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-29 14:56 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-29 14:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-10-29 20:03 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-10-29 21:01 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-29 21:07 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-10-31 10:41 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-31 15:00 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-31 15:01 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-31 18:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-02 9:55 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-11-02 18:12 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-11-04 19:15 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-11-06 15:23 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-28 10:04 ` [PATCH RFC] blk-mq: Don't IPI requests on PREEMPT_RT Peter Zijlstra
2020-12-04 19:13 [PATCH 0/3 v2] blk-mq: Don't complete in IRQ, use llist_head Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-04 19:13 ` [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-12-08 13:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-08 13:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-12-14 20:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-23 20:10 [PATCH v3 0/3] blk-mq: Don't complete in IRQ, use llist_head Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-23 20:10 ` [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-25 8:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-01-25 8:32 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-01-25 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20201102181238.GA17806@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=dave@sleepmap.de \
--cc=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).