linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Aug 1

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e54984699a0e9fc1c7f2629730ee8fecc1251f70.camel@wdc.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Aug 2018 16:57:46 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To:     "tom.leiming@...il.com" <tom.leiming@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "ming.lei@...hat.com" <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "sfr@...b.auug.org.au" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        "linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com" 
        <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        "josef@...icpanda.com" <josef@...icpanda.com>,
        "tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Aug 1

On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 00:50 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 12:40 AM, Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-08-03 at 00:27 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > This issue can be fixed by reverting d250bf4e776ff09d5 ("blk-mq: only iterate over
> > > inflight requests in blk_mq_tagset_busy_iter").
> > > 
> > > This patch looks wrong, because 'blk_mq_rq_state(rq) == MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT'
> > > isn't completely same with 'blk_mq_request_started(req)'.
> > 
> > Please test the following change instead of reverting the commit mentioned
> > above:
> > 
> > diff --git a/block/blk-mq-tag.c b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> > index 09b2ee6694fb..25a0583d8b4c 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-mq-tag.c
> > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static bool bt_tags_iter(struct sbitmap *bitmap, unsigned int bitnr, void *data)
> >          * test and set the bit before assining ->rqs[].
> >          */
> >         rq = tags->rqs[bitnr];
> > -       if (rq && blk_mq_rq_state(rq) == MQ_RQ_IN_FLIGHT)
> > +       if (rq && blk_mq_rq_state(rq) != MQ_RQ_IDLE)
> >                 iter_data->fn(rq, iter_data->data, reserved);
> > 
> >         return true;
> > 
> 
> I just sent out a similar patch on list, but use blk_mq_request_started()
> instead.
> 
> https://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=153322823307754&w=2

Hello Ming,

Since both patches are functionally equivalent, I'm fine with either version.

Bart.