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

[John Garry]

On 24/10/2022 14:27, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > -	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?
> blk_mq_bio_to_request() is one which setup these fields, then you add
> another one in blk_mq_rq_ctx_init().

ok, understood.

> > 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,
> Did you know the exact issue on nvme-tcp, nvme-rdma or nvme-fc maybe
> with blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx()?

I thought that the original issue was an OoO bounds issue, fixed in 
14dc7a18. Now there is still some issue in the following link, which is 
still unresolved as I understand:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/5bd886f1-a7c6-b765-da29-777be0328bc2@xxxxxxxxxxx/#t

But I think that 14dc7a18 may still leave undesirable scenario:
- all cpus in HW queue cpumask may go offline after cpu_online_mask read 
in blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx() and before we get the driver tag and set 
rq->hctx

> > 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)?
> But all cpus on this hctx->cpumask could become offline.

If all hctx->cpumask are offline then we should not allocate a request 
and this is acceptable. Maybe I am missing your point.

Thanks,
John