diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/block/barrier.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | Documentation/block/barrier.txt | 261 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 261 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/block/barrier.txt b/Documentation/block/barrier.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 2c2f24f634e4..000000000000 --- a/Documentation/block/barrier.txt +++ /dev/null | |||
@@ -1,261 +0,0 @@ | |||
1 | I/O Barriers | ||
2 | ============ | ||
3 | Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>, July 22 2005 | ||
4 | |||
5 | I/O barrier requests are used to guarantee ordering around the barrier | ||
6 | requests. Unless you're crazy enough to use disk drives for | ||
7 | implementing synchronization constructs (wow, sounds interesting...), | ||
8 | the ordering is meaningful only for write requests for things like | ||
9 | journal checkpoints. All requests queued before a barrier request | ||
10 | must be finished (made it to the physical medium) before the barrier | ||
11 | request is started, and all requests queued after the barrier request | ||
12 | must be started only after the barrier request is finished (again, | ||
13 | made it to the physical medium). | ||
14 | |||
15 | In other words, I/O barrier requests have the following two properties. | ||
16 | |||
17 | 1. Request ordering | ||
18 | |||
19 | Requests cannot pass the barrier request. Preceding requests are | ||
20 | processed before the barrier and following requests after. | ||
21 | |||
22 | Depending on what features a drive supports, this can be done in one | ||
23 | of the following three ways. | ||
24 | |||
25 | i. For devices which have queue depth greater than 1 (TCQ devices) and | ||
26 | support ordered tags, block layer can just issue the barrier as an | ||
27 | ordered request and the lower level driver, controller and drive | ||
28 | itself are responsible for making sure that the ordering constraint is | ||
29 | met. Most modern SCSI controllers/drives should support this. | ||
30 | |||
31 | NOTE: SCSI ordered tag isn't currently used due to limitation in the | ||
32 | SCSI midlayer, see the following random notes section. | ||
33 | |||
34 | ii. For devices which have queue depth greater than 1 but don't | ||
35 | support ordered tags, block layer ensures that the requests preceding | ||
36 | a barrier request finishes before issuing the barrier request. Also, | ||
37 | it defers requests following the barrier until the barrier request is | ||
38 | finished. Older SCSI controllers/drives and SATA drives fall in this | ||
39 | category. | ||
40 | |||
41 | iii. Devices which have queue depth of 1. This is a degenerate case | ||
42 | of ii. Just keeping issue order suffices. Ancient SCSI | ||
43 | controllers/drives and IDE drives are in this category. | ||
44 | |||
45 | 2. Forced flushing to physical medium | ||
46 | |||
47 | Again, if you're not gonna do synchronization with disk drives (dang, | ||
48 | it sounds even more appealing now!), the reason you use I/O barriers | ||
49 | is mainly to protect filesystem integrity when power failure or some | ||
50 | other events abruptly stop the drive from operating and possibly make | ||
51 | the drive lose data in its cache. So, I/O barriers need to guarantee | ||
52 | that requests actually get written to non-volatile medium in order. | ||
53 | |||
54 | There are four cases, | ||
55 | |||
56 | i. No write-back cache. Keeping requests ordered is enough. | ||
57 | |||
58 | ii. Write-back cache but no flush operation. There's no way to | ||
59 | guarantee physical-medium commit order. This kind of devices can't to | ||
60 | I/O barriers. | ||
61 | |||
62 | iii. Write-back cache and flush operation but no FUA (forced unit | ||
63 | access). We need two cache flushes - before and after the barrier | ||
64 | request. | ||
65 | |||
66 | iv. Write-back cache, flush operation and FUA. We still need one | ||
67 | flush to make sure requests preceding a barrier are written to medium, | ||
68 | but post-barrier flush can be avoided by using FUA write on the | ||
69 | barrier itself. | ||
70 | |||
71 | |||
72 | How to support barrier requests in drivers | ||
73 | ------------------------------------------ | ||
74 | |||
75 | All barrier handling is done inside block layer proper. All low level | ||
76 | drivers have to are implementing its prepare_flush_fn and using one | ||
77 | the following two functions to indicate what barrier type it supports | ||
78 | and how to prepare flush requests. Note that the term 'ordered' is | ||
79 | used to indicate the whole sequence of performing barrier requests | ||
80 | including draining and flushing. | ||
81 | |||
82 | typedef void (prepare_flush_fn)(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq); | ||
83 | |||
84 | int blk_queue_ordered(struct request_queue *q, unsigned ordered, | ||
85 | prepare_flush_fn *prepare_flush_fn); | ||
86 | |||
87 | @q : the queue in question | ||
88 | @ordered : the ordered mode the driver/device supports | ||
89 | @prepare_flush_fn : this function should prepare @rq such that it | ||
90 | flushes cache to physical medium when executed | ||
91 | |||
92 | For example, SCSI disk driver's prepare_flush_fn looks like the | ||
93 | following. | ||
94 | |||
95 | static void sd_prepare_flush(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq) | ||
96 | { | ||
97 | memset(rq->cmd, 0, sizeof(rq->cmd)); | ||
98 | rq->cmd_type = REQ_TYPE_BLOCK_PC; | ||
99 | rq->timeout = SD_TIMEOUT; | ||
100 | rq->cmd[0] = SYNCHRONIZE_CACHE; | ||
101 | rq->cmd_len = 10; | ||
102 | } | ||
103 | |||
104 | The following seven ordered modes are supported. The following table | ||
105 | shows which mode should be used depending on what features a | ||
106 | device/driver supports. In the leftmost column of table, | ||
107 | QUEUE_ORDERED_ prefix is omitted from the mode names to save space. | ||
108 | |||
109 | The table is followed by description of each mode. Note that in the | ||
110 | descriptions of QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN*, '=>' is used whereas '->' is | ||
111 | used for QUEUE_ORDERED_TAG* descriptions. '=>' indicates that the | ||
112 | preceding step must be complete before proceeding to the next step. | ||
113 | '->' indicates that the next step can start as soon as the previous | ||
114 | step is issued. | ||
115 | |||
116 | write-back cache ordered tag flush FUA | ||
117 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
118 | NONE yes/no N/A no N/A | ||
119 | DRAIN no no N/A N/A | ||
120 | DRAIN_FLUSH yes no yes no | ||
121 | DRAIN_FUA yes no yes yes | ||
122 | TAG no yes N/A N/A | ||
123 | TAG_FLUSH yes yes yes no | ||
124 | TAG_FUA yes yes yes yes | ||
125 | |||
126 | |||
127 | QUEUE_ORDERED_NONE | ||
128 | I/O barriers are not needed and/or supported. | ||
129 | |||
130 | Sequence: N/A | ||
131 | |||
132 | QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN | ||
133 | Requests are ordered by draining the request queue and cache | ||
134 | flushing isn't needed. | ||
135 | |||
136 | Sequence: drain => barrier | ||
137 | |||
138 | QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN_FLUSH | ||
139 | Requests are ordered by draining the request queue and both | ||
140 | pre-barrier and post-barrier cache flushings are needed. | ||
141 | |||
142 | Sequence: drain => preflush => barrier => postflush | ||
143 | |||
144 | QUEUE_ORDERED_DRAIN_FUA | ||
145 | Requests are ordered by draining the request queue and | ||
146 | pre-barrier cache flushing is needed. By using FUA on barrier | ||
147 | request, post-barrier flushing can be skipped. | ||
148 | |||
149 | Sequence: drain => preflush => barrier | ||
150 | |||
151 | QUEUE_ORDERED_TAG | ||
152 | Requests are ordered by ordered tag and cache flushing isn't | ||
153 | needed. | ||
154 | |||
155 | Sequence: barrier | ||
156 | |||
157 | QUEUE_ORDERED_TAG_FLUSH | ||
158 | Requests are ordered by ordered tag and both pre-barrier and | ||
159 | post-barrier cache flushings are needed. | ||
160 | |||
161 | Sequence: preflush -> barrier -> postflush | ||
162 | |||
163 | QUEUE_ORDERED_TAG_FUA | ||
164 | Requests are ordered by ordered tag and pre-barrier cache | ||
165 | flushing is needed. By using FUA on barrier request, | ||
166 | post-barrier flushing can be skipped. | ||
167 | |||
168 | Sequence: preflush -> barrier | ||
169 | |||
170 | |||
171 | Random notes/caveats | ||
172 | -------------------- | ||
173 | |||
174 | * SCSI layer currently can't use TAG ordering even if the drive, | ||
175 | controller and driver support it. The problem is that SCSI midlayer | ||
176 | request dispatch function is not atomic. It releases queue lock and | ||
177 | switch to SCSI host lock during issue and it's possible and likely to | ||
178 | happen in time that requests change their relative positions. Once | ||
179 | this problem is solved, TAG ordering can be enabled. | ||
180 | |||
181 | * Currently, no matter which ordered mode is used, there can be only | ||
182 | one barrier request in progress. All I/O barriers are held off by | ||
183 | block layer until the previous I/O barrier is complete. This doesn't | ||
184 | make any difference for DRAIN ordered devices, but, for TAG ordered | ||
185 | devices with very high command latency, passing multiple I/O barriers | ||
186 | to low level *might* be helpful if they are very frequent. Well, this | ||
187 | certainly is a non-issue. I'm writing this just to make clear that no | ||
188 | two I/O barrier is ever passed to low-level driver. | ||
189 | |||
190 | * Completion order. Requests in ordered sequence are issued in order | ||
191 | but not required to finish in order. Barrier implementation can | ||
192 | handle out-of-order completion of ordered sequence. IOW, the requests | ||
193 | MUST be processed in order but the hardware/software completion paths | ||
194 | are allowed to reorder completion notifications - eg. current SCSI | ||
195 | midlayer doesn't preserve completion order during error handling. | ||
196 | |||
197 | * Requeueing order. Low-level drivers are free to requeue any request | ||
198 | after they removed it from the request queue with | ||
199 | blkdev_dequeue_request(). As barrier sequence should be kept in order | ||
200 | when requeued, generic elevator code takes care of putting requests in | ||
201 | order around barrier. See blk_ordered_req_seq() and | ||
202 | ELEVATOR_INSERT_REQUEUE handling in __elv_add_request() for details. | ||
203 | |||
204 | Note that block drivers must not requeue preceding requests while | ||
205 | completing latter requests in an ordered sequence. Currently, no | ||
206 | error checking is done against this. | ||
207 | |||
208 | * Error handling. Currently, block layer will report error to upper | ||
209 | layer if any of requests in an ordered sequence fails. Unfortunately, | ||
210 | this doesn't seem to be enough. Look at the following request flow. | ||
211 | QUEUE_ORDERED_TAG_FLUSH is in use. | ||
212 | |||
213 | [0] [1] [2] [3] [pre] [barrier] [post] < [4] [5] [6] ... > | ||
214 | still in elevator | ||
215 | |||
216 | Let's say request [2], [3] are write requests to update file system | ||
217 | metadata (journal or whatever) and [barrier] is used to mark that | ||
218 | those updates are valid. Consider the following sequence. | ||
219 | |||
220 | i. Requests [0] ~ [post] leaves the request queue and enters | ||
221 | low-level driver. | ||
222 | ii. After a while, unfortunately, something goes wrong and the | ||
223 | drive fails [2]. Note that any of [0], [1] and [3] could have | ||
224 | completed by this time, but [pre] couldn't have been finished | ||
225 | as the drive must process it in order and it failed before | ||
226 | processing that command. | ||
227 | iii. Error handling kicks in and determines that the error is | ||
228 | unrecoverable and fails [2], and resumes operation. | ||
229 | iv. [pre] [barrier] [post] gets processed. | ||
230 | v. *BOOM* power fails | ||
231 | |||
232 | The problem here is that the barrier request is *supposed* to indicate | ||
233 | that filesystem update requests [2] and [3] made it safely to the | ||
234 | physical medium and, if the machine crashes after the barrier is | ||
235 | written, filesystem recovery code can depend on that. Sadly, that | ||
236 | isn't true in this case anymore. IOW, the success of a I/O barrier | ||
237 | should also be dependent on success of some of the preceding requests, | ||
238 | where only upper layer (filesystem) knows what 'some' is. | ||
239 | |||
240 | This can be solved by implementing a way to tell the block layer which | ||
241 | requests affect the success of the following barrier request and | ||
242 | making lower lever drivers to resume operation on error only after | ||
243 | block layer tells it to do so. | ||
244 | |||
245 | As the probability of this happening is very low and the drive should | ||
246 | be faulty, implementing the fix is probably an overkill. But, still, | ||
247 | it's there. | ||
248 | |||
249 | * In previous drafts of barrier implementation, there was fallback | ||
250 | mechanism such that, if FUA or ordered TAG fails, less fancy ordered | ||
251 | mode can be selected and the failed barrier request is retried | ||
252 | automatically. The rationale for this feature was that as FUA is | ||
253 | pretty new in ATA world and ordered tag was never used widely, there | ||
254 | could be devices which report to support those features but choke when | ||
255 | actually given such requests. | ||
256 | |||
257 | This was removed for two reasons 1. it's an overkill 2. it's | ||
258 | impossible to implement properly when TAG ordering is used as low | ||
259 | level drivers resume after an error automatically. If it's ever | ||
260 | needed adding it back and modifying low level drivers accordingly | ||
261 | shouldn't be difficult. | ||