linux-kernel - [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: honor already-setup queue merges

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: <20210802141352.74353-2-paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon,  2 Aug 2021 16:13:52 +0200
From:   Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        davidezini2@...il.com, Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: honor already-setup queue merges

The function bfq_setup_merge prepares the merging between two
bfq_queues, say bfqq and new_bfqq. To this goal, it assigns
bfqq->new_bfqq = new_bfqq. Then, each time some I/O for bfqq arrives,
the process that generated that I/O is disassociated from bfqq and
associated with new_bfqq (merging is actually a redirection). In this
respect, bfq_setup_merge increases new_bfqq->ref in advance, adding
the number of processes that are expected to be associated with
new_bfqq.

Unfortunately, the stable-merging mechanism interferes with this
setup. After bfqq->new_bfqq has been set by bfq_setup_merge, and
before all the expected processes have been associated with
bfqq->new_bfqq, bfqq may happen to be stably merged with a different
queue than the current bfqq->new_bfqq. In this case, bfqq->new_bfqq
gets changed. So, some of the processes that have been already
accounted for in the ref counter of the previous new_bfqq will not be
associated with that queue.  This creates an unbalance, because those
references will never be decremented.

This commit fixes this issue by reestablishing the previous, natural
behaviour: once bfqq->new_bfqq has been set, it will not be changed
until all expected redirections have occurred.

Signed-off-by: Davide Zini <davidezini2@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...aro.org>
---
 block/bfq-iosched.c | 16 +++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 727955918563..08d9122dd4c0 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -2659,6 +2659,15 @@ bfq_setup_merge(struct bfq_queue *bfqq, struct bfq_queue *new_bfqq)
 	 * are likely to increase the throughput.
 	 */
 	bfqq->new_bfqq = new_bfqq;
+	/*
+	 * The above assignment schedules the following redirections:
+	 * each time some I/O for bfqq arrives, the process that
+	 * generated that I/O is disassociated from bfqq and
+	 * associated with new_bfqq. Here we increases new_bfqq->ref
+	 * in advance, adding the number of processes that are
+	 * expected to be associated with new_bfqq as they happen to
+	 * issue I/O.
+	 */
 	new_bfqq->ref += process_refs;
 	return new_bfqq;
 }
@@ -2721,6 +2730,10 @@ bfq_setup_cooperator(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
 {
 	struct bfq_queue *in_service_bfqq, *new_bfqq;

+	/* if a merge has already been setup, then proceed with that first */
+	if (bfqq->new_bfqq)
+		return bfqq->new_bfqq;
+
 	/*
 	 * Check delayed stable merge for rotational or non-queueing
 	 * devs. For this branch to be executed, bfqq must not be
@@ -2822,9 +2835,6 @@ bfq_setup_cooperator(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq,
 	if (bfq_too_late_for_merging(bfqq))
 		return NULL;

-	if (bfqq->new_bfqq)
-		return bfqq->new_bfqq;
-
 	if (!io_struct || unlikely(bfqq == &bfqd->oom_bfqq))
 		return NULL;

-- 
2.20.1