Re: [PATCH 001 of 9] md: Fix deadlock in md/raid1 and md/raid10 when handling a read error.

[Andre Noll <maan@systemlinux.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1088 bytes --]

On 14:29, Neil Brown wrote:
> > Are you worried about another CPU setting conf->pending_bio_list.head
> > to != NULL after the if statement? If that's an issue I think also
> > the original patch is problematic because the same might happen after
> > the final spin_unlock_irq() but but before flush_pending_writes()
> > returns zero.
> 
> No.  I'm worried that another CPU might set
> conf->pending_bio_list.head *before* the if statement, but it isn't
> seen by this CPU because of the lack of memory barriers.  The spinlock
> ensures that the memory state is consistent.

But is that enough to avoid the deadlock? I think the following
scenario would be possible with the code in the original patch:

	// suppose conf->pending_bio_list.head==NULL ATM

	CPU0:
	int rv = 0;
	spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
	if (conf->pending_bio_list.head) // false
	spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);

	CPU1:
	conf->pending_bio_list.head = something;

	CPU0:
	return rv; // zero

Andre
-- 
The only person who always got his work done by Friday was Robinson Crusoe

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]