Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: Properly init bios from blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx()

[John Garry]

On 23/10/2022 14:12, Ming Lei wrote:
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
> > index 8070b6c10e8d..260adeb2e455 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq.c
> > @@ -402,6 +402,10 @@ static struct request *blk_mq_rq_ctx_init(struct blk_mq_alloc_data *data,
> >   		}
> >   	}
> >   
> > +	rq->__data_len = 0;
> > +	rq->__sector = (sector_t) -1;
> > +	rq->bio = rq->biotail = NULL;
> > +
> >   	return rq;
> >   }
> >   
> > @@ -591,9 +595,6 @@ struct request *blk_mq_alloc_request(struct request_queue *q, blk_opf_t opf,
> >   		if (!rq)
> >   			goto out_queue_exit;
> >   	}
> > -	rq->__data_len = 0;
> > -	rq->__sector = (sector_t) -1;
> > -	rq->bio = rq->biotail = NULL;
> This patch looks not good, why do you switch to initialize the three fields
> twice in fast path?

Can you please show me how these are initialized twice?

If there is a real concern with this then we go with my original idea, 
which was to copy the init method of blk_mq_alloc_request() (in 
blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx())

> BTW, we know blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx() has big trouble, so please
> avoid to extend it to other use cases.

Yeah, I know this, but sometimes we just need to allocate for a specific 
HW queue...

For my usecase of interest, it should not impact if the cpumask of the 
HW queue goes offline after selecting the cpu in 
blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(), so any race is ok ... I think.

However it should be still possible to make blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx() 
more robust. How about using something like work_on_cpu_safe() to 
allocate and execute the request with blk_mq_alloc_request() on a cpu 
associated with the HW queue, such that we know the cpu is online and 
stays online until we execute it? Or also extent to 
work_on_cpumask_safe() variant, so that we don't need to try all cpus in 
the mask (to see if online)?

Thanks,
John