[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <35619043-673f-73be-96bc-df0711c529e3@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 20:34:17 +0800
From: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
To: <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC: <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: don't decrement flush request refcount if it's
state is idle in flush_end_io()
Please ignore this email, I reply to the wrong wmail.
Sincerely apologize
Kuai
在 2021/08/13 17:40, yukuai (C) 写道:
> Hi, jens
>
> Can you please consider to apply this patch?
>
> Thanks
> Kuai
>
> On 2021/08/08 15:03, Yu Kuai wrote:
>> flush_end_io() currently decrement request refcount unconditionally.
>> However, it's possible that the request is already idle and it's
>> refcount is zero since that flush_end_io() can be called concurrently.
>>
>> For example, nbd_clear_que() can be called concurrently with normal
>> io completion or io timeout.
>>
>> Thus check idle before decrement to avoid refcount_t underflow
>> warning.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> block/blk-flush.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/blk-flush.c b/block/blk-flush.c
>> index 1002f6c58181..9b65dc43702c 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-flush.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-flush.c
>> @@ -222,7 +222,8 @@ static void flush_end_io(struct request *flush_rq,
>> blk_status_t error)
>> /* release the tag's ownership to the req cloned from */
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&fq->mq_flush_lock, flags);
>> - if (!refcount_dec_and_test(&flush_rq->ref)) {
>> + if (blk_mq_rq_state(flush_rq) == MQ_RQ_IDLE ||
>> + !refcount_dec_and_test(&flush_rq->ref)) {
>> fq->rq_status = error;
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fq->mq_flush_lock, flags);
>> return;
>>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists