lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: "blocked for more than 120 secs" --> a valid situation, how to prevent?
    On 10-09-23 10:53 PM, Mark Lord wrote:
    > On 10-09-23 08:05 PM, Douglas Gilbert wrote:
    >> Mark,
    >> If you issued the SG_IO ioctl with a timeout of at
    >> least 66 minutes (expressed in milliseconds) then
    >> it looks like ata_scsi_queuecmd() has a problem.
    > ..
    >
    > Mmm.. more like blk_execute_rq() perhaps.
    > That's where the wait_for_completion(&wait) call is at.
    >
    > Perhaps I should change it to wait in smaller increments,
    > so that the lockup detection doesn't trigger on it..
    ..

    This patch (below) seems to work.

    Does this look kosher enough for me to roll it up
    as a proper patch submission? Jens? Joel?

    The problem, again, is that the hangcheck timer fires
    inappropriately during very long SG_IO commands,
    such as --security-erase operations which take minutes/hours to complete.

    Thanks

    --- old/block/blk-exec.c 2010-08-26 19:47:12.000000000 -0400
    +++ linux/block/blk-exec.c 2010-09-23 23:41:47.478826002 -0400
    @@ -95,7 +95,8 @@

    rq->end_io_data = &wait;
    blk_execute_rq_nowait(q, bd_disk, rq, at_head, blk_end_sync_rq);
    - wait_for_completion(&wait);
    + while (!wait_for_completion_timeout(&wait, (sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs >> 1) * HZ))
    + ; /* periodic wakeup prevents "hung_task" warnings */

    if (rq->errors)
    err = -EIO;

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-09-27 20:09    [from the cache]
    ©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site