From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>, Wen Xiong <wenxiong@us.ibm.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] blk-mq: not deactivate hctx if the device doesn't use managed irq
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2021 22:17:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YNsrayg+pbVO+J7I@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1a14a397-6244-928e-5aaa-85c2ccbe0e40@suse.de>
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 02:39:14PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 6/29/21 9:49 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > hctx is deactivated when all CPU in hctx->cpumask become offline by
> > draining all requests originated from this hctx and moving new
> > allocation to active hctx. This way is for avoiding inflight IO when
> > the managed irq is shutdown.
> >
> > Some drivers(nvme fc, rdma, tcp, loop) doesn't use managed irq, so
> > they needn't to deactivate hctx. Also, they are the only user of
> > blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx() which is used for connecting io queue.
> > And their requirement is that the connect request can be submitted
> > via one specified hctx on which all CPU in its hctx->cpumask may have
> > become offline.
> >
>
> How can you submit a connect request for a hctx on which all CPUs are
> offline? That hctx will be unusable as it'll never be able to receive
> interrupts ...
I believe BLK_MQ_F_NOT_USE_MANAGED_IRQ is self-explanatory. And the
interrupt(non-managed) of this hctx will be migrated to online CPUs,
see migrate_one_irq().
For managed irq, we have to prevent new allocation if all CPUs of this
hctx is offline because genirq will shutdown the interrupt.
>
> > Address the requirement for nvme fc/rdma/loop, so the reported kernel
> > panic on the following line in blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx() can be fixed.
> >
> > data.ctx = __blk_mq_get_ctx(q, cpu)
> >
> > Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>
> > Cc: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
> > Cc: Wen Xiong <wenxiong@us.ibm.com>
> > Cc: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > block/blk-mq.c | 6 +++++-
> > include/linux/blk-mq.h | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> > index df5dc3b756f5..74632f50d969 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> > @@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ struct request *blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(struct request_queue *q,
> > data.hctx = q->queue_hw_ctx[hctx_idx];
> > if (!blk_mq_hw_queue_mapped(data.hctx))
> > goto out_queue_exit;
> > - cpu = cpumask_first_and(data.hctx->cpumask, cpu_online_mask);
> > + cpu = cpumask_first(data.hctx->cpumask);
> > data.ctx = __blk_mq_get_ctx(q, cpu);
>
> I don't get it.
> Doesn't this allow us to allocate a request on a dead cpu, ie the very thing
> we try to prevent?
It is fine to allocate & dispatch one request to the hctx when all CPU on
its cpumask are offline if this hctx's interrupt isn't managed.
Thanks,
Ming
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-29 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-29 7:49 [PATCH 0/2] blk-mq: fix blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx Ming Lei
2021-06-29 7:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-mq: not deactivate hctx if the device doesn't use managed irq Ming Lei
2021-06-29 12:39 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-06-29 14:17 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2021-06-29 15:49 ` John Garry
2021-06-30 0:32 ` Ming Lei
2021-06-30 9:25 ` John Garry
2021-07-01 9:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-06-29 23:30 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-06-30 18:58 ` Sagi Grimberg
2021-06-30 21:57 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-07-01 14:20 ` Keith Busch
2021-06-29 7:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] nvme: pass BLK_MQ_F_NOT_USE_MANAGED_IRQ for fc/rdma/tcp/loop Ming Lei
2021-06-30 8:15 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-06-30 8:47 ` Ming Lei
2021-06-30 8:18 ` [PATCH 0/2] blk-mq: fix blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx Hannes Reinecke
2021-06-30 8:42 ` Ming Lei
2021-06-30 9:43 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-06-30 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2021-06-30 18:59 ` Sagi Grimberg
2021-06-30 19:46 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-06-30 23:59 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-01 8:00 ` Hannes Reinecke
2021-07-01 9:13 ` Ming Lei
2021-07-02 9:47 ` Daniel Wagner
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=YNsrayg+pbVO+J7I@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dwagner@suse.de \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=wenxiong@us.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).