linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] blk-mq: replace timeout synchronization with a RCU and generation based scheme

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: <1513286010.2475.58.camel@wdc.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Dec 2017 21:13:32 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To:     "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-team@...com" <kernel-team@...com>,
        "oleg@...hat.com" <oleg@...hat.com>, "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>,
        "osandov@...com" <osandov@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] blk-mq: replace timeout synchronization with a RCU
 and generation based scheme

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 11:19 -0800, tj@...nel.org wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 06:51:11PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 11:01 -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > --- a/block/blk-core.c
> > > +++ b/block/blk-core.c
> > > @@ -126,6 +126,8 @@ void blk_rq_init(struct request_queue *q, struct request *rq)
> > >  	rq->start_time = jiffies;
> > >  	set_start_time_ns(rq);
> > >  	rq->part = NULL;
> > > +	seqcount_init(&rq->gstate_seq);
> > > +	u64_stats_init(&rq->aborted_gstate_sync);
> > >  }
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_rq_init);
> > 
> > Sorry but the above change looks ugly to me. My understanding is that 
> > blk_rq_init() is only used inside the block layer to initialize legacy block
> > layer requests while gstate_seq and aborted_gstate_sync are only relevant
> > for blk-mq requests. Wouldn't it be better to avoid that blk_rq_init() is
> > called for blk-mq requests such that the above change can be left out? The
> > only callers outside the block layer core of blk_rq_init() I know of are
> > ide_prep_sense() and scsi_ioctl_reset(). I can help with converting the SCSI
> > code if you want.
> 
> This is also used by flush path.  We probably should clean that up,
> but let's worry about that later cuz flush handling has enough of its
> own complications.

We may have a different opinion about this but I think it is more than a
detail. This patch needs gstate_seq and aborted_gstate_sync to be preserved
across request state transitions from MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT to MR_RQ_IDLE.
blk_mq_init_request() is called at request allocation time so it's the right
context to initialize gstate_seq and aborted_gstate_sync. blk_rq_init()
however is called before a every use of a request. Sorry but I'm not
enthusiast about the code in blk_rq_init() that reinitializes state
information that should survive request reuse.

Bart.