linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: strip out locking optimization in put_io

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 14 Feb 2012 10:36:36 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@...nline.de>, mroos@...ux.ee,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: strip out locking optimization in put_io_context()

2012/2/14 Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>:
> Hello, Shaohua.
>
> Can you please test the following patch?  It's combination of three
> patches which invokes elevator icq exit from exit_io_context().  This
> unfortunately ends up adding another reverse locking loop and using
> RCU could be better; unfortunately, the change isn't trivial due to
> q->queue_lock modification during blk_cleanup_queue() and ioc cleanup
> being called after that from blk_release_queue() - IOW, while holding
> RCU, we might end up grabbing the wrong q lock (I don't think this is
> a new problem).
>
> Now that we have proper request draining on queue exit, we can
> probably move ioc clearing and other operations to blk_cleanup_queue()
> and then apply RCU, but that's for another merge window.
This fixed the regression. Thanks!
--
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/