LKML Archive on
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Cassel <>
To: Bart Van Assche <>
Cc: Jens Axboe <>,
	Damien Le Moal <>,
	Paolo Valente <>,
	Ming Lei <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mq-deadline: Fix request accounting"
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 16:28:49 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTeTQGrw41k08hgf@x1-carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 08:15:03AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/7/21 7:21 AM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > blk-mq will no longer call the I/O scheduler .finish_request() callback
> > for requests that were never inserted to the I/O scheduler.
> I do not agree. Even with patch 1/2 from this series applied, finish_request()
> will still be called for requests inserted by blk_insert_cloned_request()
> although these requests are never inserted to the I/O scheduler.
> Bart.

Hello Bart,

Looking at blk_mq_free_request(),
e->type->ops.finish_request() will only be called if RQF_ELVPRIV
is set.

blk_insert_cloned_request() doesn't seem to allocate a request
itself, but instead takes an already cloned request.

So I guess it depends on how the supplied request was cloned.

I would assume if the original request doesn't have RQF_ELVPRIV set,
then neither will the cloned request?

I tried to look at blk_rq_prep_clone(), which seems to be a common
cloning function, but I don't see req->rq_flags being copied

Anyway, I don't see how .finish_request() will be called in relation
to blk_insert_cloned_request(). Could you please help me out and
give me an example of a call chain where this can happen?

Kind regards,

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-07 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-07 14:21 [PATCH 0/2] don't call io scheduler callbacks for passthrough requests Niklas Cassel
2021-09-07 14:21 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-mq: don't call callbacks for requests that bypassed the scheduler Niklas Cassel
2021-09-07 14:29   ` Ming Lei
2021-09-07 14:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mq-deadline: Fix request accounting" Niklas Cassel
2021-09-07 14:54   ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-07 16:07     ` Niklas Cassel
2021-09-07 16:49       ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-07 15:15   ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-07 16:28     ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2021-09-07 17:12       ` Bart Van Assche
2021-09-08 11:57         ` Niklas Cassel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YTeTQGrw41k08hgf@x1-carbon \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "mq-deadline: Fix request accounting"' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).