linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH BUGFIX] block, bfq: deschedule empty bfq

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: <5b0b07fc8e50a1beac215230ca84d955@natalenko.name>
Date:   Thu, 14 Nov 2019 09:53:25 +0100
From:   Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To:     Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        linux-block <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        bfq-iosched@...glegroups.com, Chris Evich <cevich@...hat.com>,
        Patrick Dung <patdung100@...il.com>,
        Thorsten Schubert <tschubert@...h.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH BUGFIX] block, bfq: deschedule empty bfq_queues not
 referred by any process

Hi.

On 13.11.2019 18:42, Paolo Valente wrote:
>> Il giorno 13 nov 2019, alle ore 16:01, Oleksandr Natalenko 
>> <oleksandr@...alenko.name> ha scritto:
> Ok, you may have given me enough information, thank you very much.
> 
> Could you please apply the attached (compressed) patch on top of my
> offending patch?  For review purposes, here is the simple change:
> 
> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
> @@ -2728,7 +2728,8 @@ void bfq_release_process_ref(struct bfq_data
> *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
>          * freed when dequeued from service. But this is assumed to
>          * never happen.
>          */
> -       if (bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq) && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list))
> +       if (bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq) && RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&bfqq->sort_list) &&
> +           bfqq != bfqd->in_service_queue)
>                 bfq_del_bfqq_busy(bfqd, bfqq, false);
> 
>         bfq_put_queue(bfqq);

The issue is not reproducible for me after applying this patch.

Thank you.

-- 
   Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)