ide: improve handling of Power Management requests
PATCH 6/6 ide: improve handling of Power Management requests
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH] ide: improve handling of Power Management requests
Make hwif->rq point to PM request during PM sequence and do not allow any other types of requests to slip in (the old comment was never correct as there should be no such requests generated during PM sequence).
---
This was tested in the past (with an additional testing from Borislav) however there were block layer changes in the meantime so you may want to give it some more testing time just to be sure.
drivers/ide/ide-io.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
drivers/ide/ide-io.c +22 -32
@@ -466,10 +466,14 @@ void do_ide_request(struct request_queueif (!ide_lock_port (hwif)) {ide_hwif_t *prev_port; - -WARN_ON_ONCE (hwif->rq); repeat: prev_port = hwif->host->cur_port; + +if (drive->dev_flags &IDE_DFLAG_BLOCKED ) + rq = hwif->rq; +else +WARN_ON_ONCE (hwif->rq); +if (drive->dev_flags &IDE_DFLAG_SLEEPING &&time_after (drive->sleep, jiffies)) {ide_unlock_port (hwif);
@@ -496,43 +500,29 @@ repeat: hwif->cur_dev = drive; drive->dev_flags &= ~(IDE_DFLAG_SLEEPING |IDE_DFLAG_PARKED ); -spin_unlock_irq (&hwif->lock); -spin_lock_irq (q->queue_lock); -/* -* we know that the queue isn't empty, but this can happen -* if the q->prep_rq_fn() decides to kill a request -*/ -if (!rq) +if (rq ==NULL ) { +spin_unlock_irq (&hwif->lock); +spin_lock_irq (q->queue_lock); +/* +* we know that the queue isn't empty, but this can +* happen if ->prep_rq_fn() decides to kill a request +*/ rq =blk_fetch_request (drive->queue); +spin_unlock_irq (q->queue_lock); +spin_lock_irq (&hwif->lock); -spin_unlock_irq (q->queue_lock); -spin_lock_irq (&hwif->lock); - -if (!rq) { -ide_unlock_port (hwif); - goto out; +if (rq ==NULL ) { +ide_unlock_port (hwif); + goto out; + } }/* * Sanity: don't accept a request that isn't a PM request -* if we are currently power managed. This is very important as -* blk_stop_queue() doesn't prevent the blk_fetch_request() -* above to return us whatever is in the queue. Since we call -* ide_do_request() ourselves, we end up taking requests while -* the queue is blocked... -* -* We let requests forced at head of queue with ide-preempt -* though. I hope that doesn't happen too much, hopefully not -* unless the subdriver triggers such a thing in its own PM -* state machine. +* if we are currently power managed. */ -if ((drive->dev_flags &IDE_DFLAG_BLOCKED ) && -blk_pm_request (rq) ==0 && - (rq->cmd_flags &REQ_PREEMPT ) ==0 ) { -/* there should be no pending command at this point */ -ide_unlock_port (hwif); - goto plug_device; - } +BUG_ON ((drive->dev_flags &IDE_DFLAG_BLOCKED ) && +blk_pm_request (rq) ==0 ); hwif->rq = rq;
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:35:56 +0200
Quoted 7 lines
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH] ide: improve handling of Power Management requestsMake
hwif->rqpoint to PM request during PM sequence and do not allow any other types of requests to slip in (the old comment was never correct as there should be no such requests generated during PM sequence).
Quoted 5 lines
Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>---
This was tested in the past (with an additional testing from Borislav) however there were block layer changes in the meantime so you may want to give it some more testing time just to be sure.
In looking at this change, it occurs to me that this queue blocking facility could also be used to solve the user SET_XFER race.
Couldn't it?
Quoted 16 lines · On Wednesday 24 June 2009 01:24:02 David Miller wrote:
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:35:56 +0200Quoted 7 lines
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Subject: [PATCH] ide: improve handling of Power Management requestsMake
hwif->rqpoint to PM request during PM sequence and do not allow any other types of requests to slip in (the old comment was never correct as there should be no such requests generated during PM sequence).Quoted 5 lines
Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>---
This was tested in the past (with an additional testing from Borislav) however there were block layer changes in the meantime so you may want to give it some more testing time just to be sure.
Quoted 4 lines
In looking at this change, it occurs to me that this queue blocking facility could also be used to solve the user
SET_XFERrace.Couldn't it?
Probably. This is software, almost everything is possible.. ;)
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:35:56 +0200
Quoted 9 lines
Make
hwif->rqpoint to PM request during PM sequence and do not allow any other types of requests to slip in (the old comment was never correct as there should be no such requests generated during PM sequence).Signed-off-by Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[email protected]>---
This was tested in the past (with an additional testing from Borislav) however there were block layer changes in the meantime so you may want to give it some more testing time just to be sure.
This patch looks great, applied!
Thanks.