Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sat, 20 Jan 2018 00:37:36 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc:     Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@wdc.com>,
        "snitzer@redhat.com" <snitzer@redhat.com>,
        "dm-devel@redhat.com" <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
        "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        "osandov@fb.com" <osandov@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] blk-mq: fixup RESTART when queue becomes idle
Message-ID: <20180119163736.GE14827@ming.t460p>
References: <20180119023212.GA25413@ming.t460p>
 <eba1191e-4d59-a763-03b2-acd2d2812ea3@kernel.dk>
 <20180119072623.GB25369@ming.t460p>
 <047f68ec-f51b-190f-2f89-f413325c2540@kernel.dk>
 <20180119154047.GB14827@ming.t460p>
 <540e1239-c415-766b-d4ff-bb0b7f3517a7@kernel.dk>
 <20180119160518.GC14827@ming.t460p>
 <4a5c049f-0fab-bbaf-bfe2-eb5bca73f2c8@kernel.dk>
 <20180119162618.GD14827@ming.t460p>
 <1f072086-533e-4b75-d0e3-9e621b2120d8@kernel.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1f072086-533e-4b75-d0e3-9e621b2120d8@kernel.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 09:27:46AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 1/19/18 9:26 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 09:19:24AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >> On 1/19/18 9:05 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 08:48:55AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >>>> On 1/19/18 8:40 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Where does the dm STS_RESOURCE error usually come from - what's exact
> >>>>>>>> resource are we running out of?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is from blk_get_request(underlying queue), see
> >>>>>>> multipath_clone_and_map().
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's what I thought. So for a low queue depth underlying queue, it's
> >>>>>> quite possible that this situation can happen. Two potential solutions
> >>>>>> I see:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1) As described earlier in this thread, having a mechanism for being
> >>>>>>    notified when the scarce resource becomes available. It would not
> >>>>>>    be hard to tap into the existing sbitmap wait queue for that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) Have dm set BLK_MQ_F_BLOCKING and just sleep on the resource
> >>>>>>    allocation. I haven't read the dm code to know if this is a
> >>>>>>    possibility or not.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'd probably prefer #1. It's a classic case of trying to get the
> >>>>>> request, and if it fails, add ourselves to the sbitmap tag wait
> >>>>>> queue head, retry, and bail if that also fails. Connecting the
> >>>>>> scarce resource and the consumer is the only way to really fix
> >>>>>> this, without bogus arbitrary delays.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Right, as I have replied to Bart, using mod_delayed_work_on() with
> >>>>> returning BLK_STS_NO_DEV_RESOURCE(or sort of name) for the scarce
> >>>>> resource should fix this issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> It'll fix the forever stall, but it won't really fix it, as we'll slow
> >>>> down the dm device by some random amount.
> >>>>
> >>>> A simple test case would be to have a null_blk device with a queue depth
> >>>> of one, and dm on top of that. Start a fio job that runs two jobs: one
> >>>> that does IO to the underlying device, and one that does IO to the dm
> >>>> device. If the job on the dm device runs substantially slower than the
> >>>> one to the underlying device, then the problem isn't really fixed.
> >>>
> >>> I remembered that I tried this test on scsi-debug & dm-mpath over scsi-debug,
> >>> seems not observed this issue, could you explain a bit why IO over dm-mpath
> >>> may be slower? Because both two IO contexts call same get_request(), and
> >>> in theory dm-mpath should be a bit quicker since it uses direct issue for
> >>> underlying queue, without io scheduler involved.
> >>
> >> Because if you lose the race for getting the request, you'll have some
> >> arbitrary delay before trying again, potentially. Compared to the direct
> > 
> > But the restart still works, one request is completed, then the queue
> > is return immediately because we use mod_delayed_work_on(0), so looks
> > no such issue.
> 
> There are no pending requests for this case, nothing to restart the
> queue. When you fail that blk_get_request(), you are idle, nothing
> is pending.

I think we needn't worry about that, once a device is attached to
dm-rq, it can't be mounted any more, and usually user don't use the device
directly and by dm-mpath at the same time.

-- 
Ming