Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/6] xen-blkfront: quiesce/unquiesce queue instead of start/stop queues

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 07:15:56AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> stopping queue may cause race and may not stop the queue really
> after the API returns, and we have improved quiescing
> interface and it really can block dispatching once it returns.
> 
> So switch to quiesce/unquiece like what we did on other drivers
> (NVMe, NBD, mtip32xx, ...)
> 
> The blk_mq_stop_hw_queues() and blk_mq_start_stopped_hw_queues()
> used in blkif_queue_rq() and blkif_interrupt() are for congestion
> control, we leave it as it is since it is safe for this usage.

Again I yet don't understand the difference between those two, neither
why start/stop is not fixed instead of introducing quiesce/unquiece.
Not to mention that start/stop is not documented, which makes all this
even more fun.

Anyway I would like to ask, is the way to re-start a stopped queue the
same way to unquiece?

If not I would rather prefer that start/stop or quiece/unquiece is
used exclusively, in order to not make the code even more complex. It
seems fairly easy to mess up and call "start" on a "quiesced" queue
(or the other way around).

Roger.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel