All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
To: Keith Busch <keith.busch@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-nvme <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
	Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@wdc.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 23:07:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVO5sujPWiAJJgA6E=Exmb1c8FTyN-7+YEvNQ+0c_Psh8w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180522150119.GA8295@localhost.localdomain>

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Keith Busch
<keith.busch@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:57:40PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> OK, that still depends on driver's behaviour, even though it is true
>> for NVMe,  you still have to audit other drivers about this sync
>> because it is required by your patch.
>
> Okay, forget about nvme for a moment here. Please run this thought
> experiment to decide if what you're saying is even plausible for any
> block driver with the existing implementation:
>
> Your scenario has a driver return EH_HANDLED for a timed out request. The
> timeout work then completes the request. The request may then be
> reallocated for a new command and dispatched.

Yes.

>
> At approximately the same time, you're saying the driver that returned
> EH_HANDLED may then call blk_mq_complete_request() in reference to the
> *old* request that it returned EH_HANDLED for, incorrectly completing

Because this request has been completed above by blk-mq timeout,
then this old request won't be completed any more via blk_mq_complete_request()
either from normal path or what ever, such as cancel.

> the new request before it is done. That will inevitably lead to data
> corruption. Is that happening today in any driver?

No such issue since current blk-mq makes sure one req is only completed
once, but your patch changes to depend on driver to make sure that.


thanks,
Ming Lei

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tom.leiming@gmail.com (Ming Lei)
Subject: [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce
Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 23:07:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVO5sujPWiAJJgA6E=Exmb1c8FTyN-7+YEvNQ+0c_Psh8w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180522150119.GA8295@localhost.localdomain>

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Keith Busch
<keith.busch@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018@10:57:40PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> OK, that still depends on driver's behaviour, even though it is true
>> for NVMe,  you still have to audit other drivers about this sync
>> because it is required by your patch.
>
> Okay, forget about nvme for a moment here. Please run this thought
> experiment to decide if what you're saying is even plausible for any
> block driver with the existing implementation:
>
> Your scenario has a driver return EH_HANDLED for a timed out request. The
> timeout work then completes the request. The request may then be
> reallocated for a new command and dispatched.

Yes.

>
> At approximately the same time, you're saying the driver that returned
> EH_HANDLED may then call blk_mq_complete_request() in reference to the
> *old* request that it returned EH_HANDLED for, incorrectly completing

Because this request has been completed above by blk-mq timeout,
then this old request won't be completed any more via blk_mq_complete_request()
either from normal path or what ever, such as cancel.

> the new request before it is done. That will inevitably lead to data
> corruption. Is that happening today in any driver?

No such issue since current blk-mq makes sure one req is only completed
once, but your patch changes to depend on driver to make sure that.


thanks,
Ming Lei

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-22 15:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 128+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-21 23:11 [RFC PATCH 0/3] blk-mq: Timeout rework Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] blk-mq: Reference count request usage Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11   ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22  2:27   ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  2:27     ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:19   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 15:19     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] blk-mq: Fix timeout and state order Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11   ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22  2:28   ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  2:28     ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:24   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 15:24     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 16:27     ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:27       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:11 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Remove generation seqeunce Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:11   ` Keith Busch
2018-05-21 23:29   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:29     ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 14:15     ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:15       ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:29       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:29         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:34         ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:34           ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:48           ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:48             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22  2:49   ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  2:49     ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  3:16     ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22  3:16       ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22  3:47       ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  3:47         ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  3:51         ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22  3:51           ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22  8:51           ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22  8:51             ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:35             ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 14:35               ` Jens Axboe
2018-05-22 14:20     ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:20       ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:37       ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:37         ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:46         ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:46           ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:57           ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 14:57             ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:01             ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:01               ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:07               ` Ming Lei [this message]
2018-05-22 15:07                 ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:17                 ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:17                   ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 15:23                   ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 15:23                     ` Ming Lei
2018-05-22 16:17   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-22 16:17     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-23  0:34     ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23  0:34       ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23 14:35       ` Keith Busch
2018-05-23 14:35         ` Keith Busch
2018-05-24  1:52         ` Ming Lei
2018-05-24  1:52           ` Ming Lei
2018-05-23  5:48     ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-05-23  5:48       ` Hannes Reinecke
2018-07-12 18:16   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 18:16     ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 19:24     ` Keith Busch
2018-07-12 19:24       ` Keith Busch
2018-07-12 22:24       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-12 22:24         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13  1:12         ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13  1:12           ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13  2:40         ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13  2:40           ` jianchao.wang
2018-07-13 15:43         ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 15:43           ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 15:52           ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 15:52             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 18:47             ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 18:47               ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 23:03               ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 23:03                 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-13 23:58                 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-13 23:58                   ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 19:56                   ` hch
2018-07-18 19:56                     ` hch
2018-07-18 20:39                     ` hch
2018-07-18 20:39                       ` hch
2018-07-18 21:05                       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:05                         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 22:53                       ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 22:53                         ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:53                     ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:53                       ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 20:58                       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 20:58                         ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:17                         ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:17                           ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:30                           ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:30                             ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-18 21:33                             ` Keith Busch
2018-07-18 21:33                               ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 13:19                           ` hch
2018-07-19 13:19                             ` hch
2018-07-19 14:59                             ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 14:59                               ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 15:56                               ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 15:56                                 ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:04                                 ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-19 16:04                                   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-07-19 16:22                                   ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:22                                     ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 16:29                                     ` hch
2018-07-19 16:29                                       ` hch
2018-07-19 20:18                                       ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 20:18                                         ` Keith Busch
2018-07-19 13:22                       ` hch
2018-07-19 13:22                         ` hch
2018-05-21 23:29 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] blk-mq: Timeout rework Bart Van Assche
2018-05-21 23:29   ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 14:06   ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 14:06     ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:30     ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:30       ` Bart Van Assche
2018-05-22 16:44       ` Keith Busch
2018-05-22 16:44         ` Keith Busch

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='CACVXFVO5sujPWiAJJgA6E=Exmb1c8FTyN-7+YEvNQ+0c_Psh8w@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bart.vanassche@wdc.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=keith.busch@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.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.