Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754645AbYKFHZj (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 02:25:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754023AbYKFHZW (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 02:25:22 -0500 Received: from pasmtpb.tele.dk ([80.160.77.98]:47175 "EHLO pasmtpB.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753569AbYKFHZU (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2008 02:25:20 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2008 08:23:54 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: FUJITA Tomonori Cc: stern@rowland.harvard.edu, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Problems with the block-layer timeouts Message-ID: <20081106072352.GR21867@kernel.dk> References: <20081103085247.GO31673@kernel.dk> <20081106090117U.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081106090117U.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1621 Lines: 38 On Thu, Nov 06 2008, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 09:52:48 +0100 > Jens Axboe wrote: > > > > In blk_del_timer(), there's no reason to test q->rq_timed_out_fn. If > > > the method pointer is NULL then req->deadline would be 0 anyway. In > > > addition, req->deadline should be set to 0 and the end of the routine, > > > just in case req gets requeued. > > > > > > In blk_add_timer(), the line > > > > > > expiry = round_jiffies(req->deadline); > > > > > > is not optimal. round_jiffies() will sometimes round a value _down_ to > > > the nearest second. But blk_rq_timed_out_timer() tests whether > > > req->deadline is in the past -- and if the deadline was rounded down > > > then this won't be true the first time through. You wind up getting an > > > unnecessary timer interrupt. Instead there should be a > > > round_jiffies_up() utility routine, and it should be used in both > > > blk_add_timer() and blk_rq_timed_out_timer(). > > > > Very good point, we do indeed want a round_jiffies_up() for this! > > Just out of curiosity, why do we need to use round_jiffies here? We > didn't do that for SCSI, right? We don't have to, but given that we don't care about exact timeouts, we may as well. It's not a new thing, we've done that since pretty much the beginning of the generic timeout development. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/