From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B171EC433E0 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 08:00:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD522067D for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 08:00:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="bXFzvc9b" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725980AbgF0IAZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Jun 2020 04:00:25 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35314 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726034AbgF0IAY (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Jun 2020 04:00:24 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x441.google.com (mail-wr1-x441.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::441]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41803C03E979 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x441.google.com with SMTP id r12so11568111wrj.13 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 01:00:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4saGZCbwrf/WxrEzwiwMcrJYbJDxT5Ey9q2FfXo7kP4=; b=bXFzvc9bqsNSpmFQpkJcqHLIiuXkJtsPyydr9tl/IzKsi2TpjI4t+LV3i9DmSwFbNa OgoDYute85IpKFLHsnoZl5WZHPIuO1W+Z/Am1lwXVoiwCFZhOUgP4gaXjftAhDg0TW4E ArCVwvXOaMyrb0MmrZX7mkxkIvjUZ1aZFldyRjWvaVf+wMb11AIE/B7O5/Ig5nG8sd9A 5KUPR4UiC7r223ua8gc1VM5BH6oYuVEWmgxKNj9zn7iYlr6k03vSlgTVBUfeypCsQqsD Z/6iG6j0SKV5dqcvNnluA202WK3uK29XiTpWlW000m5REtsz+liS+fHfDYd0mNwzNw2R QPJg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4saGZCbwrf/WxrEzwiwMcrJYbJDxT5Ey9q2FfXo7kP4=; b=QMiNrXlwnOL2GxqBUDdTBOShgOmxHEHhEqVBKTqEzxFqlFHTDKSX7mJjDLyrMJxqXX 9Ri3AfTwiMkY5DVkY8jEM7Fh7bqbRgZJfLU3iNKgiPOXkok3wtVCOqhEJUkgECoIuBkE VWq0A0k62wJIhXTKss0bcaLq964zip9voQosi+t/oSCWj/HTiQzT3aj8zMbk4cgzQYwT d1OOOqhqgc6lISdGicllTce27E+HvPUzyIeiZvZmev1zgFCd3r+/oX6N4xtHYQiuya9p I1N2VCRbtfDq4NT0k0uQPK0Lr2MVsRzTpOi5Ggt9TC+0wXdiBoGlvyxHqnmbVxcnKswj yOhw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532tahL4hdSDMeotwQbtBweEBG8qMzIIT7iGBVfFkA+kX/qbzvVT cu37x0Rphr9rd1BEwUiHrrxIWsEFM35GUonyLao= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxNCGHvVWfgY2RBPgXebDYhhLVJbaFqTCwFZzJdCA3n0+Ig2Qt699FUbCrVAbZnRdA/eraA+WqT5kkHWkFq2Kg= X-Received: by 2002:adf:ef89:: with SMTP id d9mr8023746wro.124.1593244822940; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 01:00:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Ming Lei Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 16:00:11 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Set req quiet flag if bio is quiet To: Aleksei Marov Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-block Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 2:12 AM Aleksei Marov wrote: > > The current behavior is that if bio flagged as BIO_QUIETis submitted to request based block device then the request > that wraps this bio in a queue is not quiet. RQF_FLAG is not > set anywhere. Hence, if errors happen we can see error > messages (e.g. in print_req_error) even though bio is quiet. > This patch fixes that by setting the flag in blk_rq_bio_prep. > > Signed-off-by: Aleksei Marov > --- > block/blk.h | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/block/blk.h b/block/blk.h > index b5d1f0f..04ca4e0 100644 > --- a/block/blk.h > +++ b/block/blk.h > @@ -108,6 +108,9 @@ static inline void blk_rq_bio_prep(struct request > *rq, struct bio *bio, > > if (bio->bi_disk) > rq->rq_disk = bio->bi_disk; > + > + if (bio_flagged(bio, BIO_QUIET)) > + rq->rq_flags |= RQF_QUIET; > } BIO_QUIET consumer is fs code, and RQF_QUIET consumer is block layer, so you think the two consumers' expectation is same? -- Ming Lei