On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 01:26:48PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 10/20/22 02:10, Ming Lei wrote: > > [ ... ] > > Hi Ming, > > Fixing this in the block layer seems fine to me. A few comments: > > > + /* Before walking tags, we must ensure any submit started before the > > + * current time has finished. Since the submit uses srcu or rcu, wait > > + * for a synchronization point to ensure all running submits have > > + * finished > > + */ > > Should the above comment follow the style of other comments in the block > layer? OK. > > > + blk_mq_wait_quiesce_done(q); > > + > > + blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter(q, blk_mq_check_expired, &expired); > > The above doesn't look sufficient to me since .queue_rq() may be called > while blk_mq_queue_tag_busy_iter() is in progress. How about moving the > blk_mq_wait_quiesce_done() call into blk_mq_check_expired() and preventing > new .queue_rq() calls before the timeout handler is called? blk_mq_timeout_work() records the time before calling blk_mq_wait_quiesce_done(), and only handle requests which is timed out before the recorded jiffies, so new queued request won't be covered in this time. Thanks, Ming _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
