[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080925163351G.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:35:31 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: knikanth@...e.de
Cc: jens.axboe@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BUG: ll_merge_requests_fn() updates
req->nr_phys_segments wrongly
On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:58:02 +0530
Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de> wrote:
>
> From: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>
>
> ll_merge_requests_fn() decreases the req->nr_phys_segments if
> blk_phys_contig_segment() returns true, but it is perfectly possible that
> blk_hw_contig_segment() is false.
Yeah, in fact, blk_hw_contig_segment() is always false on the majority
of architectures (on only PARISC and Alpha, it could be true).
Your patch doesn't look correct. Virtually, the patch always disables
physical merging.
> A new hw_segment implies a new phys_segment.
> So decrementing nr_phys_segments wrongly here triggers the BUG_ON() in
> scsi_init_sgtable(), as blk_rq_map_sg() would map 1 phys_segment more than
> req->nr_phys_segment. This is easily reproducible. Other callers of
> blk_rq_map_sg() should also be affected by this bug.
I have no idea how BUG_ON() in scsi_init_sgtable() is triggered.
Can you give more information, HBA, IOMMU (if you use), and the values
of req->nr_phys_segment, req->nr_hw_segment, count, etc in in
scsi_init_sgtable() when you hit the bug?
BTW, blk_hw_contig_segment() will be removed for 2.6.28 (virtual
merging account in the block layer will be removed).
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists