From: Tao Cui <cui.tao@linux.dev>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Cc: cui.tao@linux.dev, cuitao@kylinos.cn,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] loop: defer the queue limits clear to a workqueue
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 18:32:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <446b50ad-f41d-4e08-ad33-45da37193560@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260924102027.2307044-1-cui.tao@linux.dev>
在 2026/9/24 18:20, Tao Cui 写道:
> From: Tao Cui <cuitao@kylinos.cn>
>
> loop_clear_limits() calls queue_limits_commit_update() directly from
> the loop workqueue that processes the request. That does a
> non-atomic struct assignment to q->limits without freezing the queue,
> which races with lockless readers of q->limits on other CPUs - bio
> splitting reads max_hw_sectors, the discard path reads
> max_hw_discard_sectors - and can let them observe torn values. The
> trigger is a discard or write-zeroes request on a loop device whose
> backing file does not support the corresponding fallocate operation.
>
Oops, I messed up the subject, that was supposed to be [PATCH v5].
The patch in it is the final version: rebased as a single commit,
plus one fix over v4, clear_limits_lock now covers the limits
commit too, since the queue freeze is counted and doesn't exclude
a concurrent loop_change_fd(). Please ignore the subject and treat
it as v5.
Sorry for the noise,
Tao.
> The code already has an XXX comment saying this should move to a
> workqueue. Do that: schedule a work item on the system workqueue, where
> it is safe to freeze the queue around the limits update. The pending
> modes and the rebind generation live under a new mutex,
> lo->clear_limits_lock. The work item takes the mutex with the queue
> frozen and holds it over the limits commit, so a rebind cannot slip
> in between the generation check and the commit. Rebinding the
> device drops the accumulated modes and invalidates an already
> scheduled work item, so a stale clear cannot hit the new backing
> file. The work item is cancelled before the device is freed.
>
> Suggested-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tao Cui <cuitao@kylinos.cn>
>
> ---
> Changes since v4:
>
> - Rebase onto the current block tree as a single commit.
>
> - Hold clear_limits_lock over the limits commit in the work item.
> The queue freeze is counted, not mutually exclusive, so
> loop_change_fd() could rebind between the generation check and
> the commit, and a stale clear could disable discard and write
> zeroes on the new backing file.
>
> Changes since v3:
>
> - Replace the three atomic variables (clear_limits_mode, rebind_gen,
> clear_limits_gen) with plain variables protected by a new
> clear_limits_lock mutex, as suggested by Bart. The mutex is taken
> after the queue freeze in the work item, which keeps the same
> freeze -> mutex ordering as loop_change_fd(), the only rebinding
> path that freezes the queue.
>
> Changes since v2:
>
> - Skip the clear when the device was rebound since the work item
> was scheduled: the modes used to be captured before the freeze,
> so a LOOP_CHANGE_FD completing in between could apply the old
> modes to the new backing file. The rebind generation is now
> checked with the queue frozen, which excludes loop_change_fd()
> because it assigns the new backing file under the same freeze,
> so a rebind cannot slip in between the check and the commit.
> Cancelling from loop_assign_backing_file() would instead
> deadlock on the freeze held by loop_change_fd().
>
> - Also bump the rebind generation from __loop_clr_fd(): unbinding
> does not go through loop_assign_backing_file(), so a work item
> scheduled before the last close could otherwise commit a stale
> clear to the queue limits of the unbound device.
>
> Changes since v1:
>
> - Reset clear_limits_mode when assigning a new backing file, so
> stale modes do not clear limits of the new file.
>
> - Cancel the work item from loop_remove() before del_gendisk():
> the queue can already be in RCU-delayed freeing when
> lo_free_disk() cancels it.
>
> Tested on x86-64 (qemu, vfat-backed loop device): a 30s discard and
> reconfigure loop exercises the clear path 288 times, no torn sysfs
> reads, no difference against the unpatched kernel.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260828072004.273519-1-cui.tao@linux.dev/
> ---
> drivers/block/loop.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index 758c20678bf6c..0b89036c982ad 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,11 @@ struct loop_device {
> struct list_head rootcg_cmd_list;
> struct list_head idle_worker_list;
> struct rb_root worker_tree;
> + struct work_struct clear_limits_work;
> + struct mutex clear_limits_lock;
> + unsigned int clear_limits_mode;
> + unsigned int rebind_gen;
> + unsigned int clear_limits_gen;
> struct timer_list timer;
> bool sysfs_inited;
>
> @@ -222,26 +227,53 @@ static void loop_set_size(struct loop_device *lo, loff_t size)
> kobject_uevent(&disk_to_dev(lo->lo_disk)->kobj, KOBJ_CHANGE);
> }
>
> -static void loop_clear_limits(struct loop_device *lo, int mode)
> +static void loop_clear_limits_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> {
> + struct loop_device *lo =
> + container_of(work, struct loop_device, clear_limits_work);
> struct queue_limits lim = queue_limits_start_update(lo->lo_queue);
> -
> - if (mode & FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE)
> - lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0;
> -
> - if (mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE) {
> - lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0;
> - lim.discard_granularity = 0;
> - }
> + unsigned int memflags;
> + int mode = 0;
>
> /*
> - * XXX: this updates the queue limits without freezing the queue, which
> - * is against the locking protocol and dangerous. But we can't just
> - * freeze the queue as we're inside the ->queue_rq method here. So this
> - * should move out into a workqueue unless we get the file operations to
> - * advertise if they support specific fallocate operations.
> + * Commit the unmodified limits if the device was rebound since
> + * the work item was scheduled. The freeze does not exclude a
> + * rebind through loop_change_fd(), which freezes the queue
> + * itself, so hold clear_limits_lock over the generation check
> + * and the commit: loop_assign_backing_file() bumps rebind_gen
> + * under the same mutex, so a rebind either precedes the check
> + * or follows the commit, and a stale clear cannot hit the new
> + * backing file. The other rebinding paths, loop_configure()
> + * and __loop_clr_fd(), bump rebind_gen under the same mutex
> + * without freezing the queue; the generation check detects
> + * them as well.
> */
> + memflags = blk_mq_freeze_queue(lo->lo_queue);
> + mutex_lock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + if (lo->clear_limits_gen == lo->rebind_gen) {
> + mode = lo->clear_limits_mode;
> + lo->clear_limits_mode = 0;
> +
> + if (mode & FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE)
> + lim.max_write_zeroes_sectors = 0;
> +
> + if (mode & FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE) {
> + lim.max_hw_discard_sectors = 0;
> + lim.discard_granularity = 0;
> + }
> + }
> queue_limits_commit_update(lo->lo_queue, &lim);
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(lo->lo_queue, memflags);
> +}
> +
> +static void loop_clear_limits(struct loop_device *lo, int mode)
> +{
> + mutex_lock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + lo->clear_limits_gen = lo->rebind_gen;
> + lo->clear_limits_mode |= mode;
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + schedule_work(&lo->clear_limits_work);
> }
>
> static int lo_fallocate(struct loop_device *lo, struct request *rq, loff_t pos,
> @@ -518,6 +550,10 @@ static int loop_validate_file(struct file *file, struct block_device *bdev)
> static void loop_assign_backing_file(struct loop_device *lo, struct file *file)
> {
> lo->lo_backing_file = file;
> + mutex_lock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + lo->rebind_gen++;
> + lo->clear_limits_mode = 0;
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> lo->old_gfp_mask = mapping_gfp_mask(file->f_mapping);
> mapping_set_gfp_mask(file->f_mapping,
> lo->old_gfp_mask & ~(__GFP_IO | __GFP_FS));
> @@ -1148,6 +1184,15 @@ static void __loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo)
> lo->lo_backing_file = NULL;
> spin_unlock_irq(&lo->lo_lock);
>
> + /*
> + * Invalidate any pending clear that was scheduled against the old
> + * backing file, like loop_assign_backing_file() does on rebind.
> + */
> + mutex_lock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> + lo->rebind_gen++;
> + lo->clear_limits_mode = 0;
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> +
> lo->lo_device = NULL;
> lo->lo_offset = 0;
> lo->lo_sizelimit = 0;
> @@ -1783,7 +1828,9 @@ static void lo_free_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
> destroy_workqueue(lo->workqueue);
> loop_free_idle_workers(lo, true);
> timer_shutdown_sync(&lo->timer);
> + cancel_work_sync(&lo->clear_limits_work);
> mutex_destroy(&lo->lo_mutex);
> + mutex_destroy(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> kfree(lo);
> }
>
> @@ -2102,6 +2149,8 @@ static int loop_add(int i)
> spin_lock_init(&lo->lo_lock);
> spin_lock_init(&lo->lo_work_lock);
> INIT_WORK(&lo->rootcg_work, loop_rootcg_workfn);
> + INIT_WORK(&lo->clear_limits_work, loop_clear_limits_workfn);
> + mutex_init(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&lo->rootcg_cmd_list);
> disk->major = LOOP_MAJOR;
> disk->first_minor = i << part_shift;
> @@ -2140,6 +2189,12 @@ static int loop_add(int i)
>
> static void loop_remove(struct loop_device *lo)
> {
> + /*
> + * Cancel early: the queue may already be in RCU-delayed freeing
> + * by the time lo_free_disk() cancels the work item.
> + */
> + cancel_work_sync(&lo->clear_limits_work);
> +
> /* Make this loop device unreachable from pathname. */
> del_gendisk(lo->lo_disk);
> blk_mq_free_tag_set(&lo->tag_set);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-24 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-24 10:20 [PATCH] loop: defer the queue limits clear to a workqueue Tao Cui
2026-09-24 10:32 ` Tao Cui [this message]
2026-09-24 18:01 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-09-25 1:29 ` Tao Cui
2026-09-25 16:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-09-26 11:20 ` Tao Cui
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-08-28 7:20 Tao Cui
2026-08-28 16:34 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-31 13:34 ` Tao Cui
2026-08-31 16:25 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-09-01 13:14 ` Tao Cui
2026-09-01 17:29 ` Bart Van Assche
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=446b50ad-f41d-4e08-ad33-45da37193560@linux.dev \
--to=cui.tao@linux.dev \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=cuitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.