On 1/19/18 8:20 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Fri, 2018-01-19 at 15:26 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
quoted
Please see queue_delayed_work_on(), hctx->run_work is shared by all
scheduling, once blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(100ms) returns, no new
scheduling can make progress during the 100ms.
How about addressing that as follows:
diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index f7515dd95a36..57f8379a476d 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -1403,9 +1403,9 @@ static void __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, bool async,
put_cpu();
}
- kblockd_schedule_delayed_work_on(blk_mq_hctx_next_cpu(hctx),
- &hctx->run_work,
- msecs_to_jiffies(msecs));
+ kblockd_mod_delayed_work_on(blk_mq_hctx_next_cpu(hctx),
+ &hctx->run_work,
+ msecs_to_jiffies(msecs));
}
Exactly. That's why I said it was just a bug in my previous email, not
honoring a newer run is just stupid. Only other thing you have to be
careful with here is the STOPPED bit.
--
Jens Axboe