linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] blk: fix a wrong accounting of hd_struct->in

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]

Message-ID: <4CBC06B2.7070107@kernel.dk>
Date:	Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:34:58 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
CC:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] blk: fix a wrong accounting of hd_struct->in_flight

On 2010-10-18 10:28, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Jens,
> 
>> This looks good! To quiesce the queue, something like the below.
>> Completely untested.
> 
> Thank you for your advice.
> I applied your idea to the patch.

But you changed it, though:

>  	if (old_ptbl) {
>  		rcu_assign_pointer(old_ptbl->last_lookup, NULL);
> +		spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> +		elv_quiesce_start(q);
>  		call_rcu(&old_ptbl->rcu_head, disk_free_ptbl_rcu_cb);
> +		elv_quiesce_end(q);
> +		spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
>  	}
>  }

That is not going to work. The point is to start the drain period
before, then end it when the callback has gone through. By placing it
just after the call_rcu() call, there's no guarentee that the RCU grace
period has elapsed. That is why I placed it inside the rcu callback. Why
did you move it?

For the above to work, you'd need to use synchronize_rcu() instead.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/