From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f196.google.com ([209.85.220.196]:45869 "EHLO mail-qk0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754417AbeF0TUu (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:20:50 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-f196.google.com with SMTP id c198-v6so1667397qkg.12 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 12:20:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:20:48 -0400 From: Josef Bacik To: Jens Axboe Cc: Josef Bacik , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hannes@cmpxchg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] block: introduce blk-iolatency io controller Message-ID: <20180627192046.ieqncfl6ioy37mof@destiny> References: <20180625151243.2132-1-josef@toxicpanda.com> <20180625151243.2132-13-josef@toxicpanda.com> <05a581ed-8f21-9d89-a813-a03d802d3469@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <05a581ed-8f21-9d89-a813-a03d802d3469@kernel.dk> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 01:06:31PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 6/25/18 9:12 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > > +static void __blkcg_iolatency_throttle(struct rq_qos *rqos, > > + struct iolatency_grp *iolat, > > + spinlock_t *lock, bool issue_as_root, > > + bool use_memdelay) > > + __releases(lock) > > + __acquires(lock) > > +{ > > + struct rq_wait *rqw = &iolat->rq_wait; > > + unsigned use_delay = atomic_read(&lat_to_blkg(iolat)->use_delay); > > + DEFINE_WAIT(wait); > > + bool first_block = true; > > + > > + if (use_delay) > > + blkcg_schedule_throttle(rqos->q, use_memdelay); > > + > > + /* > > + * To avoid priority inversions we want to just take a slot if we are > > + * issuing as root. If we're being killed off there's no point in > > + * delaying things, we may have been killed by OOM so throttling may > > + * make recovery take even longer, so just let the IO's through so the > > + * task can go away. > > + */ > > + if (issue_as_root || fatal_signal_pending(current)) { > > + atomic_inc(&rqw->inflight); > > + return; > > + } > > + > > + if (iolatency_may_queue(iolat, &wait, first_block)) > > + return; > > + > > + do { > > + prepare_to_wait_exclusive(&rqw->wait, &wait, > > + TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE); > > + > > + iolatency_may_queue(iolat, &wait, first_block); > > + first_block = false; > > + > > + if (lock) { > > + spin_unlock_irq(lock); > > + io_schedule(); > > + spin_lock_irq(lock); > > + } else { > > + io_schedule(); > > + } > > + } while (1); > > So how does this wait loop ever exit? > Sigh, I cleaned this up from what we're using in production and did it poorly, I'll fix it up. Thanks, Josef