Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933341AbeALKUt (ORCPT + 1 other); Fri, 12 Jan 2018 05:20:49 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f178.google.com ([209.85.128.178]:36642 "EHLO mail-wr0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932734AbeALKUr (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jan 2018 05:20:47 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosjOuF7iytX195hZO5qGvGYw4/SSBsQqy7CC+hlAmm0+LWJrcl+eK6FrA5xx+KIMMkgsC5NTA== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH IMPROVEMENT] block, bfq: limit sectors served with interactive weight raising From: Paolo Valente In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:20:44 +0100 Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-block , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ulf Hansson , Mark Brown , Linus Walleij , bfq-iosched@googlegroups.com, oleksandr@natalenko.name Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Message-Id: <9F56E963-E99C-4B7A-B66A-83FC29B544CD@linaro.org> References: <20171228111917.2767-1-paolo.valente@linaro.org> <5a9c6573-84a6-ae7b-7058-f202c7187065@applied-asynchrony.com> <12660CC7-AD89-434A-9BEA-BA0B4C362807@linaro.org> To: =?utf-8?Q?Holger_Hoffst=C3=A4tte?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: > Il giorno 12 gen 2018, alle ore 11:15, Holger Hoffstätte ha scritto: > > On 01/12/18 06:58, Paolo Valente wrote: >> >> >>> Il giorno 28 dic 2017, alle ore 15:00, Holger Hoffstätte ha scritto: >>> >>> >>> On 12/28/17 12:19, Paolo Valente wrote: >>> (snip half a tech report ;) >>> >>> So either this or the previous patch ("limit tags for writes and async I/O" >>> can lead to a hard, unrecoverable hang with heavy writes. Since I couldn't >>> log into the affected system anymore I couldn't get any stack traces, blk-mq >>> debug output etc. but there was nothing in dmesg/on the console, so it >>> wasn't a BUG/OOPS. >>> >>> -h >> >> Hi Holger, >> if, as I guess, this problem hasn't gone away for you, I have two >> requests: >> 1) could you share your exact test >> 2) if nothing happens in my systems with your test, would you be >> willing to retry with the dev version of bfq? It should be able to >> tell us what takes to your hang. If you are willing to do this test, >> I'll prepare a branch with everything already configured for you. > > Hi, > > thanks for following up but there's no need for any of that; it turned out > to be something else since I got the same hang without those patches at > least once (during a btrfs balance, even though it didn't look like btrfs' > fault directly; more like block/mm/helpers. > > So on January 7 I posted to linux-block et.al. where I said > "So this turned out to be something else, sorry for the false alarm." > but apparently that didn't make it through since it's not in the > archives either. Sorry. > > Long story short, the good news is that I've been running with both patches > since then without any issue. :) > Wow, what a relief! :) So, Jens, being the only issue reported gone, can you please consider queueing this patch and the other pending one [1]? They are both critical for bfq performance. Thanks, Paolo [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2684463.html > cheers > Holger