From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: ZiyangZhang <ZiyangZhang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.com,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/7] ublk_drv: define macros for recovery feature and check them
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 13:04:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YylJ9Qu5k5S5ZcJs@T590> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220913041707.197334-4-ZiyangZhang@linux.alibaba.com>
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 12:17:03PM +0800, ZiyangZhang wrote:
> Define some macros for recovery feature. Especially define a new state:
> UBLK_S_DEV_QUIESCED which implies that ublk_device is quiesced
> and is ready for recovery. This state can be observed by userspace.
>
> UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY implies that:
> (1) ublk_drv enables recovery feature. It won't let monitor_work to
> automatically abort rqs and release the device.
> (2) With a dying ubq_daemon, ublk_drv ends(aborts) rqs issued to
> userspace(ublksrv) before crash.
> (3) With a dying ubq_daemon, in task work and ublk_queue_rq(),
> ublk_drv requeues rqs.
>
> UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE implies that:
> (1) everything UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY implies except
> (2) With a dying ubq_daemon, ublk_drv requeues rqs issued to
> userspace(ublksrv) before crash.
>
> UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE is designed for backends which:
> (1) tolerates double-writes because ublk_drv may issue the same rq
> twice.
> (2) does not let frontend users get I/O error. such as read-only FS
> and VM backend.
>
> Signed-off-by: ZiyangZhang <ZiyangZhang@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/ublk_drv.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h | 7 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> index 0c6db0978ed0..23337bd7c105 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/ublk_drv.c
> @@ -49,7 +49,9 @@
> /* All UBLK_F_* have to be included into UBLK_F_ALL */
> #define UBLK_F_ALL (UBLK_F_SUPPORT_ZERO_COPY \
> | UBLK_F_URING_CMD_COMP_IN_TASK \
> - | UBLK_F_NEED_GET_DATA)
> + | UBLK_F_NEED_GET_DATA \
> + | UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY \
> + | UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE)
>
> /* All UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_* should be included here */
> #define UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_ALL (UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_BASIC | UBLK_PARAM_TYPE_DISCARD)
> @@ -323,6 +325,47 @@ static inline int ublk_queue_cmd_buf_size(struct ublk_device *ub, int q_id)
> PAGE_SIZE);
> }
>
> +static inline bool ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(
> + struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> +{
> + if (ubq->flags & UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY)
> + return true;
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void ublk_disable_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++) {
> + struct ublk_queue *ubq = ublk_get_queue(ub, i);
> +
> + ubq->flags &= ~UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY;
> + }
> +}
Flags is supposed to not changed, especially ublk_disable_recovery
isn't necessary with my suggestion in the following link:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/YylEjEply6y+bs0B@T590/T/#u
> +
> +static inline bool ublk_can_use_recovery(struct ublk_device *ub)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ub->dev_info.nr_hw_queues; i++) {
> + struct ublk_queue *ubq = ublk_get_queue(ub, i);
> +
> + if (!ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq))
> + return false;
> + }
> + return true;
> +}
The above is too tricky, why can't check ub->dev_info &
UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY directly?
> +
> +static inline bool ublk_queue_can_use_recovery_reissue(
> + struct ublk_queue *ubq)
> +{
> + if (ublk_queue_can_use_recovery(ubq) &&
> + (ubq->flags & UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE))
> + return true;
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static void ublk_free_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
> {
> struct ublk_device *ub = disk->private_data;
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h b/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> index 677edaab2b66..87204c39f1ee 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/ublk_cmd.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@
> #define UBLK_CMD_STOP_DEV 0x07
> #define UBLK_CMD_SET_PARAMS 0x08
> #define UBLK_CMD_GET_PARAMS 0x09
> +#define UBLK_CMD_START_USER_RECOVERY 0x10
> +#define UBLK_CMD_END_USER_RECOVERY 0x11
>
> /*
> * IO commands, issued by ublk server, and handled by ublk driver.
> @@ -74,9 +76,14 @@
> */
> #define UBLK_F_NEED_GET_DATA (1UL << 2)
>
> +#define UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY (1UL << 3)
> +
> +#define UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE (1UL << 4)
The above are two features. I'd suggest to add UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY
and its implementation first, then add one delta patch for supporting
the new feature of UBLK_F_USER_RECOVERY_REISSUE.
Not only it is more helpful for reviewing, but also easier to understand
the two's difference.
thanks,
Ming
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-20 5:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-13 4:17 [PATCH V3 0/7] ublk_drv: add USER_RECOVERY support ZiyangZhang
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 1/7] ublk_drv: check 'current' instead of 'ubq_daemon' ZiyangZhang
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 2/7] ublk_drv: refactor ublk_cancel_queue() ZiyangZhang
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 3/7] ublk_drv: define macros for recovery feature and check them ZiyangZhang
2022-09-20 5:04 ` Ming Lei [this message]
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 4/7] ublk_drv: requeue rqs with recovery feature enabled ZiyangZhang
2022-09-19 3:55 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-19 9:12 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-19 12:39 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 1:31 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 2:39 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 3:04 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 3:18 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 3:34 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 4:41 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 5/7] ublk_drv: consider recovery feature in aborting mechanism ZiyangZhang
2022-09-19 9:32 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-19 9:55 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-19 12:33 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 1:49 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 3:04 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 3:24 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 4:01 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 4:39 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 4:49 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 5:03 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 4:45 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-20 5:05 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 6/7] ublk_drv: add START_USER_RECOVERY and END_USER_RECOVERY support ZiyangZhang
2022-09-19 13:03 ` Ming Lei
2022-09-20 2:41 ` Ziyang Zhang
2022-09-13 4:17 ` [PATCH V3 7/7] ublk_drv: do not run monitor_work while ub's state is QUIESCED ZiyangZhang
2022-09-19 2:17 ` [PATCH V3 0/7] ublk_drv: add USER_RECOVERY support Ziyang Zhang
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=YylJ9Qu5k5S5ZcJs@T590 \
--to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=ZiyangZhang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiaoguang.wang@linux.alibaba.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).