On Wed, Feb 03 2016 at 10:49pm -0500,
jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2016/2/4 11:24, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 03 2016 at 9:08pm -0500,
> > jiangyiwen <jiangyiwen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> When two processes submit WRTIE SAME bio simultaneously and
> >> first IO return failed because of INVALID FIELD IN CDB, and
> >> then second IO can enter into an infinite loop.
> >> The problem can be described as follows:
> >>
> >> process 1 process 2
> >> submit_bio(REQ_WRITE_SAME) and
> >> wait io completion
> >> begin submit_bio(REQ_WRITE_SAME)
> >> -> blk_queue_bio()
> >> -> dm_request_fn()
> >> -> map_request()
> >> -> scsi_request_fn()
> >> -> blk_peek_request()
> >> -> scsi_prep_fn()
> >> In the moment, IO return and
> >> sense_key with illegal_request,
> >> sense_code with 0x24(INVALID FIELD IN CDB).
> >> In this way it will set no_write_same = 1
> >> in sd_done() and disable write same
> >> In sd_setup_write_same_cmnd()
> >> when find (no_write_same == 1)
> >> will return BLKPREP_KILL,
> >> and then in blk_peek_request()
> >> set error to EIO.
> >> However, in multipath_end_io()
> >> when find error is EIO it will
> >> fail path and retry even if
> >> device doesn't support WRITE SAME.
> >>
> >> In this situation, when process of multipathd reinstate
> >> path by using test_unit_ready periodically, it will cause
> >> second WRITE SAME IO enters into an infinite loop and
> >> loop never terminates.
> >>
> >> In do_end_io(), when finding device doesn't support WRITE SAME and
> >> request is WRITE SAME, return EOPNOTSUPP to applications.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Yiwen Jiang <jiangyiwen@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reviewed-by: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Reviewed-by: xuejiufei <xuejiufei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/md/dm-mpath.c | 5 +++++
> >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-mpath.c b/drivers/md/dm-mpath.c
> >> index cfa29f5..ad1602a 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/md/dm-mpath.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-mpath.c
> >> @@ -1269,6 +1269,11 @@ static int do_end_io(struct multipath *m, struct request *clone,
> >> if (noretry_error(error))
> >> return error;
> >>
> >> + /* do not retry in case of WRITE SAME not supporting */
> >> + if ((clone->cmd_flags & REQ_WRITE_SAME) &&
> >> + !clone->q->limits.max_write_same_sectors)
> >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> +
> >> if (mpio->pgpath)
> >> fail_path(mpio->pgpath);
> >>
> >
> > Did you test this patch? Looks like it isn't going to make a
> > difference. 'error' will be -EREMOTEIO, which will be caught by
> > noretry_error(). So we'll never go on to run your new code.
> >
> > Please see commit 7eee4ae2db ("dm: disable WRITE SAME if it fails").
> >
> > I think DM already handles this case properly. The only thing is it'll
> > return -EREMOTEIO (rather than -EOPNOTSUPP) further up the stack.
> >
> > .
> >
> Hi Mike,
> Yes, I have already test in version linux-3.8, and I also have already
> carefully checked latest kernel code, and find that it also exists this
> problem. I know about this commit 7eee4ae2db ("dm: disable WRITE SAME
> if it fails"), it only can solve first IO situation which I mentioned
> above, in other words, when WRITE SAME IO truly send to device, it
> actually return -EREMOTEIO if device doesn't support WRITE SAME.
> But in above situation which issues two WRITE SAME IO simultaneously,
> second IO will not truly send to device instead of returning
> BLKPREP_KILL in sd_setup_write_same_cmnd() because find
> (no_write_same == 1) which no_write_same is set when first IO returned,
> and then in blk_peek_request() will return EIO to MD/DM which caused
> the problem above mentioned.
>
> I have described detailed process of problem, you will find actually
> it is a problem when reviewed carefully.
OK, so -EIO is getting returned. That shouldn't happen. -EIO is the
generic catch-all error that we're going to retry. We have
differentiated IO errors in SCSI that get returned up the IO stack
(e.g. -EREMOTEIO, etc).
The SCSI, or block layer, should return a non-retryable error for this
case. But we only have the differentiated IO errors for SCSI cmds that
are issued, so it seems we still need to train SCSI (and block by
association/dependency) to return permanent errors that are identified
during request preparation.
But it may be that we need to widen the WRITE_SAME error handling code
in DM to check for -EREMOTEIO or -EOPNOTSUPP. But I'm really not in
favor of special-casing -EIO for WRITE_SAME, we need to be sprinkling
less special-case code to make up for lack of information for lower
layers.
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
