On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:12:01PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Fri, 2017-04-14 at 00:40 -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:05:32PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 16:01 -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote: > > > > Looking at this, I think we have similar issues with most of the other > > > > debugfs files. Should we move the debugfs cleanup earlier? > > > > > > That's a good question. However, while I was debugging it was very convenient > > > to be able to access the queue state after it had reached the "dead" state. > > > Performing the cleanup earlier would be an alternative solution but would > > > make debugging a bit harder ... > > > > What useful information were you getting out of debugfs once the queue > > was already dead? Wasn't the interesting stuff freed at that point? > > Hello Omar, > > I'm currently chasing a stall of dm-rq + dm-mpath that occurs after the > queues below it have reached the "dead" state. I will look for another > way to obtain the information I need such that we can remove the block > layer queue debugfs information before these queues reach the "dead" > state. > > Bart. Thanks, Bart. In this case, the absence of the "mq" directory should tell you that the queue is dead. Will you move the cleanup in v2 or should I submit a separate patch?
