From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>
To: "ming.lei@redhat.com" <ming.lei@redhat.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
        "martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        "axboe@fb.com" <axboe@fb.com>, "hare@suse.com" <hare@suse.com>,
        "holger@applied-asynchrony.com" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
        "jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: run queue if SCSI device queue isn't ready and
 queue is idle
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] SCSI: run queue if SCSI device queue isn't ready and
 queue is idle
Thread-Index: AQHTbZ4g7T3yQq9yCkKeO51Qk7DLeaM060uAgAAFpYCAAJ2AAIAA7uSA
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 16:07:17 +0000
Message-ID: <1512576435.3297.3.camel@wdc.com>
References: <20171205075256.10319-1-ming.lei@redhat.com>
         <1512490099.2660.6.camel@sandisk.com> <20171205162825.GA23788@ming.t460p>
         <20171206015212.GB26512@ming.t460p>
In-Reply-To: <20171206015212.GB26512@ming.t460p>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
wdcipoutbound: EOP-TRUE
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <C6311B4186A0184C9F9B881FE4CEA678@namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 30807494-d26c-4254-0af5-08d53cc36c40
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 06 Dec 2017 16:07:17.2718
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: b61c8803-16f3-4c35-9b17-6f65f441df86
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY1PR0401MB1530
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by nfs id vB6G7TS7001147
Content-Length: 1463
Lines: 33

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 09:52 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:28:25AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 04:08:20PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > The patch below is not a full solution but resulted in a significant
> > > improvement in my tests:
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/block/blk-mq-sched.c b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> > > index 69e3226e66ca..9d86876ec503 100644
> > > --- a/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> > > +++ b/block/blk-mq-sched.c
> > > @@ -226,6 +226,7 @@ void blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx)
> > >  		 * TODO: get more budgets, and dequeue more requests in
> > >  		 * one time.
> > >  		 */
> > > +		blk_mq_sched_mark_restart_hctx(hctx);
> > >  		blk_mq_do_dispatch_ctx(hctx);
> > >  	} else {
> > >  		blk_mq_flush_busy_ctxs(hctx, &rq_list);
> 
> BTW, this kind of change can't cover scsi_set_blocked() which is
> triggered by timeout, scsi dispatch failure. You will see that
> easily if you run the SCSI test script I provided in the commit log.

Hello Ming,

I am aware that the above change does not cover all cases. That's why I wrote
in my previous e-mail that that patch is not a full solution. The reason I
posted that change anyway is because I prefer a solution that is not based on
delayed queue runs over a solution that is based on delayed queue runs
(blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue()). My concern is that performance of a solution
based on delayed queue runs will be suboptimal.

Bart.