All of lore.kernel.org
 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
     [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
     [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
2020-06-06 12:02   ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] scsi: ufs: Add Host Performance Booster Support Avri Altman
     [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@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
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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.