From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
To: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],
Bijan Mottahedeh <[email protected]>,
Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 103/142] Revert "block: end bio with BLK_STS_AGAIN in case of non-mq devs and REQ_NOWAIT"
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 23:06:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YBsedX0/[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 01:28:26PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-02-03 14:03:09 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On v5.4.43-101-gbba91cdba612 this fails with
> > > fio: io_u error on file /mnt/t2/test.0.0: Input/output error: write offset=0, buflen=4096
> > > fio: pid=734, err=5/file:io_u.c:1834, func=io_u error, error=Input/output error
> > >
> > > whereas previously it worked. libaio still works...
> > >
> > > I haven't checked which major kernel version fixed this again, but I did
> > > verify that it's still broken in 5.4.94 and that 5.10.9 works.
> > >
> > > I would suspect it's
> > >
> > > commit 4503b7676a2e0abe69c2f2c0d8b03aec53f2f048
> > > Author: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> > > Date: 2020-06-01 10:00:27 -0600
> > >
> > > io_uring: catch -EIO from buffered issue request failure
> > >
> > > -EIO bubbles up like -EAGAIN if we fail to allocate a request at the
> > > lower level. Play it safe and treat it like -EAGAIN in terms of sync
> > > retry, to avoid passing back an errant -EIO.
> > >
> > > Catch some of these early for block based file, as non-mq devices
> > > generally do not support NOWAIT. That saves us some overhead by
> > > not first trying, then retrying from async context. We can go straight
> > > to async punt instead.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> > >
> > >
> > > which isn't in stable/linux-5.4.y
> >
> > Can you test that if the above commit is added, all works well again?
>
> It doesn't apply cleanly, I'll try to resolve the conflict. However, I
> assume that the revert was for a concrete reason - but I can't quite
> figure out what b0beb28097fa04177b3769f4bb7a0d0d9c4ae76e was concretely
> solving, and whether reverting the revert in 5.4 would re-introduce a
> different problem.
>
> commit b0beb28097fa04177b3769f4bb7a0d0d9c4ae76e (tag: block-5.7-2020-05-29, linux-block/block-5.7)
> Author: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> Date: 2020-05-28 13:19:29 -0600
>
> Revert "block: end bio with BLK_STS_AGAIN in case of non-mq devs and REQ_NOWAIT"
>
> This reverts commit c58c1f83436b501d45d4050fd1296d71a9760bcb.
>
> io_uring does do the right thing for this case, and we're still returning
> -EAGAIN to userspace for the cases we don't support. Revert this change
> to avoid doing endless spins of resubmits.
>
> Cc: [email protected] # v5.6
> Reported-by: Bijan Mottahedeh <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
>
> I suspect it just wasn't aimed at 5.4, and that's that, but I'm not
> sure. In which case presumably reverting
> bba91cdba612fbce4f8575c5d94d2b146fb83ea3 would be the right fix, not
> backporting 4503b7676a2e0abe69c2f2c0d8b03aec53f2f048 et al.
Ok, can you send a revert patch for this?
But it would be good to get Jens to weigh in on this...
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-03 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <[email protected]>
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2021-02-03 12:37 ` [PATCH 5.4 103/142] Revert "block: end bio with BLK_STS_AGAIN in case of non-mq devs and REQ_NOWAIT" Andres Freund
2021-02-03 13:03 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-02-03 21:28 ` Andres Freund
2021-02-03 22:06 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2021-02-03 22:58 ` Jens Axboe
2021-02-03 23:59 ` Andres Freund
2021-02-04 14:36 ` Jens Axboe
2021-02-04 15:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
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=YBsedX0/[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