Hi tejun
On 12/16/2017 08:07 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> After the recent updates to use generation number and state based
> synchronization, blk-mq no longer depends on REQ_ATOM_COMPLETE except
> to avoid firing the same timeout multiple times.
>
> Remove all REQ_ATOM_COMPLETE usages and use a new rq_flags flag
> RQF_MQ_TIMEOUT_EXPIRED to avoid firing the same timeout multiple
> times. This removes atomic bitops from hot paths too.
>
> v2: Removed blk_clear_rq_complete() from blk_mq_rq_timed_out().
>
> v3: Added RQF_MQ_TIMEOUT_EXPIRED flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> block/blk-mq.c | 18 ++++++++----------
> block/blk-timeout.c | 1 +
> include/linux/blkdev.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> index 88baa82..47e722b 100644
> --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> @@ -607,14 +607,12 @@ void blk_mq_complete_request(struct request *rq)
> */
> if (!(hctx->flags & BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING)) {
> rcu_read_lock();
> - if (blk_mq_rq_aborted_gstate(rq) != rq->gstate &&
> - !blk_mark_rq_complete(rq))
> + if (blk_mq_rq_aborted_gstate(rq) != rq->gstate)
> __blk_mq_complete_request(rq);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> } else {
> srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(hctx->queue_rq_srcu);
> - if (blk_mq_rq_aborted_gstate(rq) != rq->gstate &&
> - !blk_mark_rq_complete(rq))
> + if (blk_mq_rq_aborted_gstate(rq) != rq->gstate)
> __blk_mq_complete_request(rq);
> srcu_read_unlock(hctx->queue_rq_srcu, srcu_idx);
> }
It's worrying that even though the blk_mark_rq_complete() here is intended to synchronize with
timeout path, but it indeed give the blk_mq_complete_request() the capability to exclude with
itself. Maybe this capability should be reserved.
Thanks
Jianchao
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
