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]
Date:   Sat, 27 May 2023 09:06:41 +0800
From:   Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>
To:     hch@....de, axboe@...nel.dk
Cc:     cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yukuai3@...wei.com,
        yukuai1@...weicloud.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com
Subject: [PATCH -next v3 2/5] blk-wbt: remove dead code to handle wbt enable/disable with io inflight

From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>

enable or disable wbt is always called with queue freezed, so that wbt
can never be enabled or disabled while io is still inflight, and this
behaviour should always hold to avoid io hang(There have been reported
several times).

Therefor, the code to handle wbt enable/diskble with io inflight is not
and never will be used, hence remove such dead code.

Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
---
 block/blk-wbt.c | 16 ----------------
 1 file changed, 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-wbt.c b/block/blk-wbt.c
index 9ec2a2f1eda3..cb464c572840 100644
--- a/block/blk-wbt.c
+++ b/block/blk-wbt.c
@@ -200,15 +200,6 @@ static void wbt_rqw_done(struct rq_wb *rwb, struct rq_wait *rqw,
 
 	inflight = atomic_dec_return(&rqw->inflight);
 
-	/*
-	 * wbt got disabled with IO in flight. Wake up any potential
-	 * waiters, we don't have to do more than that.
-	 */
-	if (unlikely(!rwb_enabled(rwb))) {
-		rwb_wake_all(rwb);
-		return;
-	}
-
 	/*
 	 * For discards, our limit is always the background. For writes, if
 	 * the device does write back caching, drop further down before we
@@ -545,13 +536,6 @@ static inline unsigned int get_limit(struct rq_wb *rwb, blk_opf_t opf)
 {
 	unsigned int limit;
 
-	/*
-	 * If we got disabled, just return UINT_MAX. This ensures that
-	 * we'll properly inc a new IO, and dec+wakeup at the end.
-	 */
-	if (!rwb_enabled(rwb))
-		return UINT_MAX;
-
 	if ((opf & REQ_OP_MASK) == REQ_OP_DISCARD)
 		return rwb->wb_background;
 
-- 
2.39.2

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ