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  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]
Date:   Sat, 11 May 2019 01:58:05 +0200
From:   Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>
To:     Eric Wheeler <stable@...ts.ewheeler.net>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "open list:BFQ I/O SCHEDULER" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Wheeler <bfq@...ux.ewheeler.net>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bfq: backport: update internal depth state when queue
 depth changes

On 5/11/19 1:17 AM, Eric Wheeler wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2019, Sasha Levin wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 10:56:32AM -0700, Eric Wheeler wrote:
>>> From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>>>
>>> commit 77f1e0a52d26242b6c2dba019f6ebebfb9ff701e upstream
>>>
>>> A previous commit moved the shallow depth and BFQ depth map calculations
>>> to be done at init time, moving it outside of the hotter IO path. This
>>> potentially causes hangs if the users changes the depth of the scheduler
>>> map, by writing to the 'nr_requests' sysfs file for that device.
>>>
>>> Add a blk-mq-sched hook that allows blk-mq to inform the scheduler if
>>> the depth changes, so that the scheduler can update its internal state.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Wheeler <bfq@...ux.ewheeler.net>
>>> Tested-by: Kai Krakow <kai@...shome.de>
>>> Reported-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
>>> Fixes: f0635b8a416e ("bfq: calculate shallow depths at init time")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>
>> I wasn't clear on what was backported here, so I've queued the upstream
>> version on 4.19 and 4.14, it doesn't seem to be relevant to older
>> branches.
> 
> 
> Thanks Sasha.  We needed it for 4.19, I wasn't sure how far it would patch
> back so I left the version off.  BFQ was merged in 4.12 iirc, so if it
> patched against 4.14, then 4.19 and 4.14 are the only ones that need it.

It was applied in mainline for 5.1 and also applies fine to 5.0.x, so IMHO
that wouldn't hurt either.

thanks,
Holger

Powered by blists - more mailing lists