Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Yv0A6UhioH3rbi0E@T590> <f633c476-bdc9-40e2-a93f-29601979f833@www.fastmail.com>
 <Yv0KmT8UYos2/4SX@T590> <35f0d608-7448-4276-8922-19a23d8f9049@www.fastmail.com>
 <Yv2P0zyoVvz35w/m@T590> <568465de-5c3b-4d94-a74b-5b83ce2f942f@www.fastmail.com>
 <Yv2w+Tuhw1RAoXI5@T590> <9f2f608a-cd5f-4736-9e6d-07ccc2eca12c@www.fastmail.com>
 <a817431f-276f-4aab-9ff8-c3e397494339@www.fastmail.com> <5426d0f9-6539-477d-8feb-2b49136b960f@www.fastmail.com>
 <Yv3NIQlDL0T3lstU@T590> <aadeb600-4e3a-4b69-bc17-fd2918c5b061@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <aadeb600-4e3a-4b69-bc17-fd2918c5b061@www.fastmail.com>
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 23:10:13 +0800
Message-ID: <CAFj5m9JGGMOc1k71KbiHWu07Vh5FucOtR_yU35eDAfX_2GL0TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: stalling IO regression since linux 5.12, through 5.18
To:     Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
Cc:     Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@suse.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>,
        Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-RAID <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 9:50 PM Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022, at 1:24 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>
> >
> > Also please test the following one too:
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> > index 5ee62b95f3e5..d01c64be08e2 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> > @@ -1991,7 +1991,8 @@ bool blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx
> > *hctx, struct list_head *list,
> >               if (!needs_restart ||
> >                   (no_tag && list_empty_careful(&hctx->dispatch_wait.entry)))
> >                       blk_mq_run_hw_queue(hctx, true);
> > -             else if (needs_restart && needs_resource)
> > +             else if (needs_restart && (needs_resource ||
> > +                                     blk_mq_is_shared_tags(hctx->flags)))
> >                       blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(hctx, BLK_MQ_RESOURCE_DELAY);
> >
> >               blk_mq_update_dispatch_busy(hctx, true);
> >
>
> Should I test both patches at the same time, or separately? On top of v5.17 clean, or with b6e68ee82585 still reverted?

Please test it separately against v5.17.

thanks,