linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V7 6/6] SCSI: set block queue at preempt only when SCSI device is put into quiesce

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: <20171003081702.GB23564@ming.t460p>
Date:   Tue, 3 Oct 2017 16:17:03 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
        Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
        Cathy Avery <cavery@...hat.com>,
        Martin Steigerwald <martin@...htvoll.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 6/6] SCSI: set block queue at preempt only when SCSI
 device is put into quiesce

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 06:52:25AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Simply quiesing SCSI device isn't safe, it is easy
> > +	 * to use up requests because all these allocated requests
> > +	 * can't be dispatched when device is put in QIUESCE.
> > +	 * Then no request can be allocated and we may hang
> > +	 * somewhere, such as system suspend/resume.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * So we set block queue in preempt only first, no new
> > +	 * normal request can enter queue any more, and all pending
> > +	 * requests are drained once blk_set_preempt_only()
> > +	 * returns. Only RQF_PREEMPT is allowed in preempt only mode.
> > +	 */
> > +	blk_set_preempt_only(sdev->request_queue, true);
> > +
> >  	mutex_lock(&sdev->state_mutex);
> >  	err = scsi_device_set_state(sdev, SDEV_QUIESCE);
> 
> Why is this not under state_mutex so that we guarantee it's atomic
> vs sdev state changes?

It isn't necessary since what we want is to make sure only RQF_PREEMPT
is allowed once blk_set_preempt_only() returns, and putting a lock
before freezing queue might risk to deadlock.

-- 
Ming