From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH] as i/o hang with aacraid driver 2.6.0-test1 Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 13:11:00 +0200 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20030717111059.GI833@suse.de> References: <20030716132036.GB833@suse.de> <1058364455.1856.28.camel@mulgrave> <20030716170456.GK833@suse.de> <20030717015756.135a3f5a.akpm@osdl.org> <20030717085952.GX833@suse.de> <3F1672D9.7070309@cyberone.com.au> <20030717102926.GE833@suse.de> <3F167F98.60006@cyberone.com.au> <20030717105641.GF833@suse.de> <3F1683F5.4030107@cyberone.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:55717 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271424AbTGQK4J (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jul 2003 06:56:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F1683F5.4030107@cyberone.com.au> List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , James.Bottomley@steeleye.com, markh@osdl.org, cliffw@osdl.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 17 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > Jens Axboe wrote: > > >On Thu, Jul 17 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: > > > >> > >>Jens Axboe wrote: > >> > >> > >>>On Thu, Jul 17 2003, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Jens Axboe wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>On Thu, Jul 17 2003, Andrew Morton wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>So this is what I ended up with. Could we please have confirmation > >>>>>>that it > >>>>>>fixes the aacraid hang? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>It doesn't, it's just a pre-requisite to fixing the bug :-) > >>>>> > >>>>>Nick should chime in with how we wants it to be handled from > >>>>>blk_requeue_request(), he needs to decrease dispatched from there. We > >>>>>could always add some hook for it of course, but... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>Well you could just put an elv_completed_request in there, but > >>>> > >>>> > >>>Yeah, I told Andrew to add that for now. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>I suppose it really wants an elv_requeue_request - which would > >>>>just default to elv_add_request for other schedulers. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>I'd rather keep it seperate, ie just a requeue notifier. How's this? > >>> > >>> > >>Well it would be much nicer for AS if it were seperate. Basically > >>AS wants the requeue implemented as as_add_request but without > >>the accounting updates: there has been no request completed, and > >>no really new request. > >> > >>If the requeue were seperate to the add, it would simply be a call > >>to as_completed_request in as-iosched.c. > >> > > > >Like this then? Nicer semantics, too. > > > > Jens, this is exactly right. Would you be OK with this? Everyone else? I'm happy with it. -- Jens Axboe