lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
DateThu, 23 Sep 2010 23:51:21 -0400
FromMark Lord <>
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]
©2003-2010