linux-kernel - Re: Multi-partition block layer behaviour

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:51:02 +0530
From:	Tiju Jacob <jacobtiju@...il.com>
To:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Multi-partition block layer behaviour

>> ok, thanks. So this means the elevator is switching in the test. How
>> about below patch:
>>
>> diff --git a/block/elevator.c b/block/elevator.c
>> index a3b64bc..e14824a 100644
>> --- a/block/elevator.c
>> +++ b/block/elevator.c
>> @@ -683,8 +683,13 @@ void __elv_add_request(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq, int where)
>>                 * - Usually, back inserted requests won't be merged
>>                 *   with anything.  There's no point in delaying queue
>>                 *   processing.
>> +                * If elevator is switching, doesn't need run the queue.
>> +                * elevator switching will run it anyway. And this could
>> +                * cause warning since the code might run in atomic
>> +                * environment(blk_flush_plug_list() callbed in schedule())
>>                 */
>> -               __blk_run_queue(q);
>> +               if (!test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_ELVSWITCH, &q->queue_flags))
>> +                       __blk_run_queue(q);
>>                break;
>>
>>        case ELEVATOR_INSERT_SORT_MERGE:
>>
>>
> oh, wait. We should have no this issue with latest kernel, because
> blk_schedule_flush_plug is moved out of schedule atomic environment. please
> try a latest kernel, for example, 3.1.
>

Even after applying the above patch, I am getting the same error. We
have to use the linux 3.0.* kernel series. So is there a fix for the
3.0 series?
We'll defenetly check with the 3.1 kernel and let know.

Thanks,
--TJ
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/