From: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v2 1/4] target: Fix multi task->task_sg[] chaining logic bug
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:27:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DD2E846.6090009@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305088535-27486-2-git-send-email-nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Acked-by: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
On 5/10/2011 9:35 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> From: Nicholas Bellinger<nab@linux-iscsi.org>
>
> This patch fixes a bug in transport_do_task_sg_chain() used by HW target
> mode modules with sg_chain() to provide a single sg_next() walkable memory
> layout for use with pci_map_sg() and friends. This patch addresses an
> issue with mapping multiple small block max_sector tasks across multiple
> struct se_task->task_sg[] mappings for HW target mode operation.
>
> This was causing OOPs with (cmd->t_task->t_tasks_no> 1) I/O traffic for
> HW target drivers using transport_do_task_sg_chain(), and has been tested
> so far with tcm_fc(openfcoe), tcm_qla2xxx, and ib_srpt fabrics with
> t_tasks_no> 1 IBLOCK backends using a smaller max_sectors to trigger the
> original issue.
>
> Reported-by: Kiran Patil<kiran.patil@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Bellinger<nab@linux-iscsi.org>
> ---
> drivers/target/target_core_transport.c | 26 +++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> index 9583b23..fefe10a 100644
> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> @@ -4776,18 +4776,20 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> sg_end_cur->page_link&= ~0x02;
>
> sg_chain(sg_head, task_sg_num, sg_head_cur);
> - sg_count += (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> - } else
> sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> + } else {
> + sg_chain(sg_head, task_sg_num, sg_head_cur);
> + sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> + }
>
> sg_head = sg_head_cur;
> sg_link = sg_link_cur;
> - task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> continue;
> }
> sg_head = sg_first =&task->task_sg[0];
> sg_link =&task->task_sg[task->task_sg_num];
> - task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> /*
> * Check for single task..
> */
> @@ -4798,9 +4800,12 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> */
> sg_end =&task->task_sg[task->task_sg_num - 1];
> sg_end->page_link&= ~0x02;
> - sg_count += (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> - } else
> sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> + } else {
> + sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> + }
> }
> /*
> * Setup the starting pointer and total t_tasks_sg_linked_no including
> @@ -4809,21 +4814,20 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained = sg_first;
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no = sg_count;
>
> - DEBUG_CMD_M("Setup T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained: %p and"
> - " t_tasks_sg_chained_no: %u\n", T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained,
> + DEBUG_CMD_M("Setup cmd: %p T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained: %p and"
> + " t_tasks_sg_chained_no: %u\n", cmd, T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained,
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no);
>
> for_each_sg(T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained, sg,
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no, i) {
>
> - DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p page: %p length: %d offset: %d\n",
> - sg, sg_page(sg), sg->length, sg->offset);
> + DEBUG_CMD_M("SG[%d]: %p page: %p length: %d offset: %d, magic: 0x%08x\n",
> + i, sg, sg_page(sg), sg->length, sg->offset, sg->sg_magic);
> if (sg_is_chain(sg))
> DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p sg_is_chain=1\n", sg);
> if (sg_is_last(sg))
> DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p sg_is_last=1\n", sg);
> }
> -
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(transport_do_task_sg_chain);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-11 4:35 [PATCH-v2 0/4] Bugfixes for .39-rc8 Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 1/4] target: Fix multi task->task_sg[] chaining logic bug Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-17 21:27 ` Kiran Patil [this message]
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 2/4] target: Fix interrupt context bug with stats_lock and core_tmr_alloc_req Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 3/4] target: Fix bug with task_sg chained transport_free_dev_tasks release Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 4/4] target: Fix task->task_execute_queue=1 clear bug + LUN_RESET OOPs Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-14 0:05 ` [PATCH-v2 0/4] Bugfixes for .39-rc8 Nicholas A. Bellinger
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=4DD2E846.6090009@intel.com \
--to=kiran.patil@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.