[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVPh3SSp3V7hHJaPnp-koyh7n7hqf+Ugv9CMg2gO_8MwXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 23:24:37 +0800
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <dahi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Virtualization List <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org >> Linux Kernel Mailing List"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: blk-mq crash under KVM in multiqueue block code (with virtio-blk
and ext4)
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
>
> Another way would be to ensure that the timeout handler doesn't touch hw_ctx
> or tag_sets that aren't fully initialized yet. But I think this is
> safer/cleaner.
That may not be easy or enough to check if hw_ctx/tag_sets are
fully initialized if you mean all requests have been used one time.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:11 PM, David Hildenbrand
> I was playing with a simple patch that just sets cmd_flags and action_flags to
What is action_flags?
> 0. That should already be sufficient to hinder blk_mq_tag_to_rq and the calling
> method to do the wrong thing.
Yes, clearing rq->cmd_flags should be enough.
And looks better to move rq initialization to __blk_mq_free_request()
too, otherwise timeout still may see old cmd_flags and rq->q before
rq's new initialization.
Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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