All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Jun'ichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: Fix device removal NULL pointer dereference
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 10:00:01 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE98821.7090307@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340695524.3058.5.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>

On 06/26/12 07:25, James Bottomley wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 06:46 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 06/25/12 21:14, James Bottomley wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 2012-06-25 at 18:15 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>>>> index 6dfb978..c26ef49 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>>>> @@ -406,10 +406,7 @@ static void scsi_run_queue(struct request_queue *q)
>>>>  	LIST_HEAD(starved_list);
>>>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>>>  
>>>> -	/* if the device is dead, sdev will be NULL, so no queue to run */
>>>> -	if (!sdev)
>>>> -		return;
>>>> -
>>>> +	BUG_ON(!sdev);
>>>
>>> Needs to be a blk_queue_dead() check as well.
>>
>> Callers of scsi_run_queue() don't hold the queue lock. Does it make
>> sense to test whether the queue is dead without the queue lock being held ?
> 
> I'm not entirely sure I understand the question, but I think you think
> that locking is required to read the queue state?  That's emphatically
> not correct.  In fact, you don't even need locking to write the state
> provied the state variable is a natcural processor witdth (i.e. u32 on
> 32 bit or u64 or u32 on 64 bit) and you don't do dependent state
> variable updates or other atomic sequences.


Sorry if my comment was not clear enough. What I meant is that since
callers of scsi_run_queue() don't hold the queue lock that the queue can
become dead even after having checked the queue state at the start of
that function. Since scsi_run_queue() can already handle queue state
changes while it is in progress, it is fine to leave out the queue state
check at the start of that function.

Bart.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-26 10:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-25 18:12 [PATCH 0/4 v9] SCSI device removal fixes Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 18:14 ` [PATCH 1/4] block: Fix blk_execute_rq_nowait() dead queue handling Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 18:41   ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-25 19:18     ` Muthu Kumar
2012-06-25 18:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] scsi: Fix device removal NULL pointer dereference Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 20:36   ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-25 21:14   ` James Bottomley
2012-06-25 21:21     ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-25 21:35       ` James Bottomley
2012-06-26  7:02         ` Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 22:05     ` Mike Christie
2012-06-26  7:19       ` James Bottomley
2012-06-26  7:26         ` Bart Van Assche
2012-06-26  6:46     ` Bart Van Assche
2012-06-26  7:25       ` James Bottomley
2012-06-26 10:00         ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2012-06-26  9:13       ` Mike Christie
2012-06-26 10:03         ` Bart Van Assche
2012-06-26 15:03         ` Hannes Reinecke
2012-06-25 18:16 ` [PATCH 3/4] scsi: Change return type of scsi_queue_insert() into void Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 18:17 ` [PATCH 4/4] scsi: Stop accepting SCSI requests before removing a device Bart Van Assche
2012-06-25 20:42   ` Tejun Heo
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-06-07 18:39 [PATCH 0/4 v8] Fixes for SCSI device removal Bart Van Assche
2012-06-07 18:43 ` [PATCH 2/4] scsi: Fix device removal NULL pointer dereference Bart Van Assche
2012-06-05 17:08 [PATCH 0/4 v7] Fixes for SCSI device removal Bart Van Assche
2012-06-05 17:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] scsi: Fix device removal NULL pointer dereference 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=4FE98821.7090307@acm.org \
    --to=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
    --cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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.