From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
To: Jeffle Xu <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] block: disable iopoll for split bio
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:52:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 03:56:24PM +0800, Jeffle Xu wrote:
> iopoll is initially for small size, latency sensitive IO. It doesn't
> work well for big IO, especially when it needs to be split to multiple
> bios. In this case, the returned cookie of __submit_bio_noacct_mq() is
> indeed the cookie of the last split bio. The completion of *this* last
> split bio done by iopoll doesn't mean the whole original bio has
> completed. Callers of iopoll still need to wait for completion of other
> split bios.
>
> Besides bio splitting may cause more trouble for iopoll which isn't
> supposed to be used in case of big IO.
>
> iopoll for split bio may cause potential race if CPU migration happens
> during bio submission. Since the returned cookie is that of the last
> split bio, polling on the corresponding hardware queue doesn't help
> complete other split bios, if these split bios are enqueued into
> different hardware queues. Since interrupts are disabled for polling
> queues, the completion of these other split bios depends on timeout
> mechanism, thus causing a potential hang.
>
> iopoll for split bio may also cause hang for sync polling. Currently
> both the blkdev and iomap-based fs (ext4/xfs, etc) support sync polling
> in direct IO routine. These routines will submit bio without REQ_NOWAIT
> flag set, and then start sync polling in current process context. The
> process may hang in blk_mq_get_tag() if the submitted bio has to be
> split into multiple bios and can rapidly exhaust the queue depth. The
> process are waiting for the completion of the previously allocated
> requests, which should be reaped by the following polling, and thus
> causing a deadlock.
>
> To avoid these subtle trouble described above, just disable iopoll for
> split bio.
>
> Suggested-by: Ming Lei <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffle Xu <[email protected]>
> ---
> block/blk-merge.c | 7 +++++++
> block/blk-mq.c | 6 ++++--
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-merge.c b/block/blk-merge.c
> index bcf5e4580603..53ad781917a2 100644
> --- a/block/blk-merge.c
> +++ b/block/blk-merge.c
> @@ -279,6 +279,13 @@ static struct bio *blk_bio_segment_split(struct request_queue *q,
> return NULL;
> split:
> *segs = nsegs;
> +
> + /*
> + * bio splitting may cause subtle trouble such as hang when doing iopoll,
Please capitalize the first character of a multi-line comments. Also
this adds an overly long line.
> + hctx = q->queue_hw_ctx[blk_qc_t_to_queue_num(cookie)];
> + if (hctx->type != HCTX_TYPE_POLL)
> + return 0;
I think this is good as a sanity check, but shouldn't we be able to
avoid even hitting this patch if we ensure that BLK_QC_T_NONE is
returned after a bio is split?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-19 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-17 7:56 [PATCH v4 0/2] block, iomap: disable iopoll for split bio Jeffle Xu
2020-11-17 7:56 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] block: " Jeffle Xu
2020-11-19 3:06 ` JeffleXu
2020-11-19 17:52 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2020-11-20 9:22 ` JeffleXu
2020-11-17 7:56 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] block,iomap: disable iopoll when split needed Jeffle Xu
2020-11-17 17:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2020-11-18 1:56 ` JeffleXu
2020-11-19 17:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-20 10:06 ` JeffleXu
2020-11-24 11:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-11-25 7:03 ` JeffleXu
2020-11-17 12:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] block, iomap: disable iopoll for split bio JeffleXu
2020-11-18 9:50 ` JeffleXu
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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