linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] blk: improve order of bio handling in generic_make

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]

Message-ID: <942d4be2-b7f0-8410-a63b-109a57f63e93@profitbricks.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Mar 2017 16:53:20 +0100
From:   Jack Wang <jinpu.wang@...fitbricks.com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:     NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@...bit.com>,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
        Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk: improve order of bio handling in
 generic_make_request()



On 07.03.2017 16:46, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-03-06 10:43:59, Jack Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 06.03.2017 05:40, NeilBrown wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 03 2017, Jack Wang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Neil for pushing the fix.
>>>>
>>>> We can optimize generic_make_request a little bit:
>>>> - assign bio_list struct hold directly instead init and merge
>>>> - remove duplicate code
>>>>
>>>> I think better to squash into your fix.
>>>
>>> Hi Jack,
>>>  I don't object to your changes, but I'd like to see a response from
>>>  Jens first.
>>>  My preference would be to get the original patch in, then other changes
>>>  that build on it, such as this one, can be added.  Until the core
>>>  changes lands, any other work is pointless.
>>>
>>>  Of course if Jens wants a this merged before he'll apply it, I'll
>>>  happily do that.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> NeilBrown
>>
>> Hi Neil,
>>
>> Totally agree, let's wait for Jens's decision.
>>
>> Hi Jens,
>>
>> Please consider this fix also for stable 4.3+ 
> 
> Stable? We don't put this into stable, with exception of minimal fixes
> for real bugs...
> 									Pavel
> 
It indeed fixes deadlock in RAID1 case.
Please follow the link I replied to Jens regarding the test.
It did hit us in our production.

Thanks,
Jack