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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 2 Mar 2018 05:12:36 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To:     "opensource.ganesh@...il.com" <opensource.ganesh@...il.com>
CC:     "jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi_lib: increase {host|target|device}_busy count after
 dispatch cmd

On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 12:56 +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> 2018-03-02 7:11 GMT+08:00 Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>:
> > On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 17:37 +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> > > In android system, when there are lots of threads running. Thread A
> > > holding *host_busy* count is easily to be preempted, and if at the
> > > same time, thread B set *host_blocked*, then all other threads will
> > > be io blocked.
> > 
> > Have you considered to insert preempt_disable() and preempt_enable() calls
> > where necessary to achieve the same effect? I think that would result in a
> > much less intrusive patch.
> 
> Yes, preempt_disable()preempt_enable will also achieve the same effect.
> But I just think preempt_disable()preempt_enable may be a little heavy for
> this problem which can be fixed by increaseing {host|target|device}_busy count
> after dispatch cmd.

Hello Ganesh,

If the {host,target,device}_busy counts would be increased after dispatch,
could that result in scsi_device_unbusy() being called from the completion
path before these counts have been increased?

Additionally, have you noticed that your patch does not apply anymore to
recent kernels since some of the counters are now increased from inside
scsi_mq_get_budget(), a function that is called from inside the block layer?

Thanks,

Bart.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ