[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <726fe46d-afd5-4247-86a0-14d7f0eeb3b3@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 19:46:31 +0800
From: Wang Jinchao <wangjinchao600@...il.com>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] md/raid1: Fix stack memory use after return in
raid1_reshape
On 2025/6/12 19:23, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 在 2025/06/12 17:55, Wang Jinchao 写道:
>> Now that we have the same information, I prefer patch-v1 before
>> refactoring raid1_reshape,
>> because it’s really simple (only one line) and clearer to show the
>> backup and restore logic.
>> Another reason is that v2 freezes the RAID longer than v1.
>> Would you like me to provide a v3 patch combining the v2 explanation
>> with the v1 diff?
>> Thanks for your reviewing.
>
> I don't have preference here, feel free to do this.
>
> BTW, I feel raid1_reshape can be better coding with following:
>
> - covert r1bio_pool to use mempool_create_kmalloc_pool(use create
> instead of init to get rid of the werid assigment);
mempool_create_kmalloc_pool also calls init_waitqueue_head(&pool->wait)
internally, just like mempool_init.
So the issue only exists if newpool is allocated on the stack.
> - no need to reallocate pool_info;
> - convert raid1_info to use krealloc;
I think reallocating pool_info is only for backup and restore, similar
to newpool.
>
> Welcome if you are willing to, otherwise I'll find myself sometime.
I'm a newcomer to RAID and can't quite catch up with it right now.
Maybe I can refactor it later, and I look forward to your guidance.
>
> Thanks,
> Kuai
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists