| Message ID | 19009.41191.662901.179565@notabene.brown (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 01:43:35PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > Since this test was added, barriers have not worked on md, and (I > think) dm and similar devices that don't use __make_request and so > don't bother to set next_ordered. In dm, we added this: + blk_queue_ordered(md->queue, QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN, NULL); Alasdair -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Wed, June 24, 2009 5:09 pm, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 01:43:35PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: >> Since this test was added, barriers have not worked on md, and (I >> think) dm and similar devices that don't use __make_request and so >> don't bother to set next_ordered. > > In dm, we added this: > > + blk_queue_ordered(md->queue, QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN, NULL); > I obviously didn't grep for the right thing. This will obviously work, but I can't help thinking it is in the wrong place. I don't even have a queue in md/raid1, so making a statement about how it is ordered just doesn't make sense. Jens? NeilBrown -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
On Wed, Jun 24 2009, Neil Brown wrote: > On Sunday June 21, ken.milmore@googlemail.com wrote: > > I thought I had better bump my previous post as this regression is still > > present in 2.6.29.5. > > Thanks Ken. > > > > > To recap, commit cec0707e40ae25794b5a2de7b7f03c51961f80d9 has broken > > write barriers on md raid1 block devices in 2.6.29 and later kernels. > > Reversing this commit appears to fix the problem. > > > > Please let me know if I'm harassing the wrong maintainers here! > > Jens, > have you had a chance to look at this? Yeah, I think it's the right way to go. I'll queue it up for .31 and we should put in in -stable as well. > > I think the following patch is appropriate and should go in to > -stable. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown > > > From addd8b129835a63d6df9a38eae20caaa15de5988 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:39:15 +1000 > Subject: [PATCH] Restore barrier support for md and probably other virtual devices. > > The next_ordered flag is only meaningful for devices that use __make_request. > So move the test against next_ordered out of generic code and in to > __make_request > > Since this test was added, barriers have not worked on md, and (I > think) dm and similar devices that don't use __make_request and so > don't bother to set next_ordered. > > Cc: stable@kernel.org > Cc: Ken Milmore <ken.milmore@googlemail.com> > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > --- > block/blk-core.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > index b06cf5c..fc221aa 100644 > --- a/block/blk-core.c > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > @@ -1172,6 +1172,11 @@ static int __make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio) > const int unplug = bio_unplug(bio); > int rw_flags; > > + if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && > + (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { > + bio_endio(bio, -EOPNOTSUPP) > + return 0; > + } > /* > * low level driver can indicate that it wants pages above a > * certain limit bounced to low memory (ie for highmem, or even > @@ -1472,11 +1477,6 @@ static inline void __generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) > err = -EOPNOTSUPP; > goto end_io; > } > - if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && > - (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { > - err = -EOPNOTSUPP; > - goto end_io; > - } > > ret = q->make_request_fn(q, bio); > } while (ret); > -- > 1.6.3.1 >
On Wednesday June 24, jens.axboe@oracle.com wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24 2009, Neil Brown wrote: > > On Sunday June 21, ken.milmore@googlemail.com wrote: > > > I thought I had better bump my previous post as this regression is still > > > present in 2.6.29.5. > > > > Thanks Ken. > > > > > > > > To recap, commit cec0707e40ae25794b5a2de7b7f03c51961f80d9 has broken > > > write barriers on md raid1 block devices in 2.6.29 and later kernels. > > > Reversing this commit appears to fix the problem. > > > > > > Please let me know if I'm harassing the wrong maintainers here! > > > > Jens, > > have you had a chance to look at this? > > Yeah, I think it's the right way to go. I'll queue it up for .31 and we > should put in in -stable as well. Great, thanks. NeilBrown > > > > > I think the following patch is appropriate and should go in to > > -stable. > > > > Thanks, > > NeilBrown > > > > > > From addd8b129835a63d6df9a38eae20caaa15de5988 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:39:15 +1000 > > Subject: [PATCH] Restore barrier support for md and probably other virtual devices. > > > > The next_ordered flag is only meaningful for devices that use __make_request. > > So move the test against next_ordered out of generic code and in to > > __make_request > > > > Since this test was added, barriers have not worked on md, and (I > > think) dm and similar devices that don't use __make_request and so > > don't bother to set next_ordered. > > > > Cc: stable@kernel.org > > Cc: Ken Milmore <ken.milmore@googlemail.com> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> > > --- > > block/blk-core.c | 10 +++++----- > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c > > index b06cf5c..fc221aa 100644 > > --- a/block/blk-core.c > > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > > @@ -1172,6 +1172,11 @@ static int __make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio) > > const int unplug = bio_unplug(bio); > > int rw_flags; > > > > + if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && > > + (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { > > + bio_endio(bio, -EOPNOTSUPP) > > + return 0; > > + } > > /* > > * low level driver can indicate that it wants pages above a > > * certain limit bounced to low memory (ie for highmem, or even > > @@ -1472,11 +1477,6 @@ static inline void __generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) > > err = -EOPNOTSUPP; > > goto end_io; > > } > > - if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && > > - (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { > > - err = -EOPNOTSUPP; > > - goto end_io; > > - } > > > > ret = q->make_request_fn(q, bio); > > } while (ret); > > -- > > 1.6.3.1 > > > > -- > Jens Axboe -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c index b06cf5c..fc221aa 100644 --- a/block/blk-core.c +++ b/block/blk-core.c @@ -1172,6 +1172,11 @@ static int __make_request(struct request_queue *q, struct bio *bio) const int unplug = bio_unplug(bio); int rw_flags; + if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && + (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { + bio_endio(bio, -EOPNOTSUPP) + return 0; + } /* * low level driver can indicate that it wants pages above a * certain limit bounced to low memory (ie for highmem, or even @@ -1472,11 +1477,6 @@ static inline void __generic_make_request(struct bio *bio) err = -EOPNOTSUPP; goto end_io; } - if (bio_barrier(bio) && bio_has_data(bio) && - (q->next_ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE)) { - err = -EOPNOTSUPP; - goto end_io; - } ret = q->make_request_fn(q, bio); } while (ret);