Thread (27 messages) 27 messages, 7 authors, 2021-03-11

Re: [PATCH] scsi: scsi_host_queue_ready: increase busy count early

From: Ming Lei <hidden>
Date: 2021-01-22 03:25:36

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 07:45:48PM +0100, mwilck@suse.com wrote:
From: Martin Wilck <redacted>

Donald: please give this patch a try.

Commit 6eb045e092ef ("scsi: core: avoid host-wide host_busy counter for scsi_mq")
contained this hunk:

-       busy = atomic_inc_return(&shost->host_busy) - 1;
        if (atomic_read(&shost->host_blocked) > 0) {
-               if (busy)
+               if (scsi_host_busy(shost) > 0)
                        goto starved;

The previous code would increase the busy count before checking host_blocked.
With 6eb045e092ef, the busy count would be increased (by setting the
SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT bit) after the if clause for host_blocked above.

Users have reported a regression with the smartpqi driver [1] which has been
shown to be caused by this commit [2].

It seems that by moving the increase of the busy counter further down, it could
happen that the can_queue limit of the controller could be exceeded if several
CPUs were executing this code in parallel on different queues.
can_queue limit should never be exceeded because it is respected by
blk-mq since each hw queue's queue depth is .can_queue.

smartpqi's issue is that its .can_queue does not represent each hw
queue's depth, instead the .can_queue represents queue depth of the
whole HBA.

As John mentioned, smartpqi should have switched to hosttags.

BTW, looks the following code has soft lockup risk:

pqi_alloc_io_request():
        while (1) {
                io_request = &ctrl_info->io_request_pool[i];
                if (atomic_inc_return(&io_request->refcount) == 1)
                        break;
                atomic_dec(&io_request->refcount);
                i = (i + 1) % ctrl_info->max_io_slots;
        }
This patch attempts to fix it by moving setting the SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT before
the host_blocked test again. It also inserts barriers to make sure
scsi_host_busy() on once CPU will notice the increase of the count from another.

[1]: https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=160271263114829&w=2
[2]: https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=161116163722099&w=2
If the above is true wrt. smartpqi's can_queue usage, your patch may not fix the
issue completely in which you think '.can_queue is exceeded'.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Fixes: 6eb045e092ef ("scsi: core: avoid host-wide host_busy counter for scsi_mq")

Cc: Ming Lei <redacted>
Cc: Don Brace <Don.Brace@microchip.com>
Cc: Kevin Barnett <redacted>
Cc: Donald Buczek <redacted>
Cc: John Garry <redacted>
Cc: Paul Menzel <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <redacted>
---
 drivers/scsi/hosts.c    | 2 ++
 drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 8 +++++---
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/hosts.c b/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
index 2f162603876f..1c452a1c18fd 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/hosts.c
@@ -564,6 +564,8 @@ static bool scsi_host_check_in_flight(struct request *rq, void *data,
 	int *count = data;
 	struct scsi_cmnd *cmd = blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(rq);
 
+	/* This pairs with set_bit() in scsi_host_queue_ready() */
+	smp_mb__before_atomic();
So the above barrier orders atomic_read(&shost->host_blocked) and
test_bit()?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 	if (test_bit(SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT, &cmd->state))
 		(*count)++;
 
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index b3f14f05340a..0a9a36c349ee 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -1353,8 +1353,12 @@ static inline int scsi_host_queue_ready(struct request_queue *q,
 	if (scsi_host_in_recovery(shost))
 		return 0;
 
+	set_bit(SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT, &cmd->state);
+	/* This pairs with test_bit() in scsi_host_check_in_flight() */
+	smp_mb__after_atomic();
+
 	if (atomic_read(&shost->host_blocked) > 0) {
-		if (scsi_host_busy(shost) > 0)
+		if (scsi_host_busy(shost) > 1)
 			goto starved;
 
 		/*
@@ -1379,8 +1383,6 @@ static inline int scsi_host_queue_ready(struct request_queue *q,
 		spin_unlock_irq(shost->host_lock);
 	}
 
-	__set_bit(SCMD_STATE_INFLIGHT, &cmd->state);
-
Looks this patch fine.

However, I'd suggest to confirm smartpqi's .can_queue usage first, which
looks one big issue.

-- 
Ming
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help