From: "Wunderlich, Mark" <mark.wunderlich@intel.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@chelsio.com>
Cc: Samuel Jones <sjones@kalrayinc.com>, "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: Request timeout seen with NVMEoF TCP
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 18:30:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB2869100E0BA40ACB0CDDEFB0E5C60@BYAPR11MB2869.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a204cb8e-6f3b-b5dc-9972-54651c9c75cc@grimberg.me>
> I think we still have a race here with the following:
> 1. queue_rq sends h2cdata PDU (no data)
> 2. host receives r2t - prepares data PDU to send and schedules io_work 3. queue_rq sends another h2cdata PDU - ends up sending (2) because it was queued before it 4. io_work starts, loops but never able to acquire > the send_mutex - eventually just ends (dosn't requeue) 5. (3) completes, now nothing will send (2)
> We can either schedule the io_work from the direct send path, but that is less efficient than just trying to drain the send queue in the direct send path and if not all was sent, the write_space callback will trigger it.
Wouldn't the addition of the change to io_work() itself result in step (4) above never occurring? Pending always being set if mutex can not be acquired, and if io_work() then exceeds time period it always re-queues itself. So io_work() should always end up draining any send list eventually. Unless io_work() exits early for some reason via the try_recv (ret < 0) return point without requeuing.
Or, can there be a case where there are sends through queue_rq where 'last' is false (and inline send conditions fail), but there is no subsequent send with 'last' true to schedule io_work()? Might try changing queue_request() to always queue io_work() if inline send fails (not looking at last. And add the second part of your patch for io_work() to set pending to true. Also trap if ret<0 case above ever happens (or do break instead of return). Re-run and see if failure still occurs. Just a thought.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-15 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-09 17:19 Request timeout seen with NVMEoF TCP Potnuri Bharat Teja
2020-12-09 18:02 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-10 17:06 ` Potnuri Bharat Teja
2020-12-10 21:47 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-11 7:26 ` Potnuri Bharat Teja
2020-12-14 17:51 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-14 18:05 ` Potnuri Bharat Teja
2020-12-14 19:27 ` Samuel Jones
2020-12-14 20:13 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-15 1:53 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-15 18:30 ` Wunderlich, Mark [this message]
2020-12-19 1:04 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-16 5:51 ` Potnuri Bharat Teja
2020-12-19 1:35 ` Sagi Grimberg
2020-12-21 7:50 ` Potnuri Bharat Teja
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=BYAPR11MB2869100E0BA40ACB0CDDEFB0E5C60@BYAPR11MB2869.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=mark.wunderlich@intel.com \
--cc=bharat@chelsio.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=sjones@kalrayinc.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.