Re: [PATCH BUGFIX V3] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




> Il giorno 13 feb 2018, alle ore 06:02, Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx> ha scritto:
> 
> On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 13:48 +0100, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
>> Hi.
>> 
>> 12.02.2018 12:22, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> How does that work without someone actually submitting patches?  CC
>>> stable and pass along a conveniently sorted cherry-pick list?
>> 
>> From my experience, Greg is fine with the list of hashes, but he needs 
>> an approval from the relevant subtree maintainer (Jens in this case).
> 
> Oh dear.  I'm a bit reluctant to even mention this, buuut, when
> creating that hash list, I extracted/applied them to 4.15.3 via quilt
> to make sure that they really do slip right in.. and later, while
> building two fat enterprise config kernels concurrently, trees living
> in separate spinning rust buckets, box IO stalled on me.  Not good.
>  Hard reboot, clean up and try it again, it reproduced.  Switch to
> master, that reproduced.  Extra not good.
> 
> I found that rather odd, because I had earlier done this to 4.15..
> 
> patches/block-bfq:-fix-occurrences-of-request-finish-method-s-old-name.patch
> patches/block-bfq:-add-requeue-request-hook.patch
> 
> ..ie take only the rename, wedge the fix in on top of it, beat on box,
> it worked fine.  This morning, I go back to only those two, and box is
> again (at least pretending to be) perfectly happy to build the same
> trees it hung on twice in a row yesterday, it _seems_ to be completely
> uninterested in stalling no matter what I do.
> 
> So, something not so funny is still going on, here at least.  Test
> results imply that something in that hash list _may_ not be all that
> desirable a thing to send to stable, but who knows, some playful
> gremlin may well be pulling my chain, will let box stall on me again a
> few seconds after I write that, and poke send :)
> 
> Ok IO gremlin, go for it...
> 

Any chance your gremlin grants you some OOPS?

BTW, the only other commit in that series that affects bfq interaction
with the rest of the system is:
a52a69ea89dc block, bfq: limit tags for writes and async I/O

And the other commits that do something beyond changing some calculation are:
0d52af590552 block, bfq: release oom-queue ref to root group on exit
52257ffbfcaf block, bfq: put async queues for root bfq groups too

Thanks,
Paolo

> 	-Mike





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]