Re: [for-4.16 PATCH v3 2/3] block: allow gendisk's request_queue registration to be deferred

Mike Snitzer
2018-01-11T17:04:40Z

On Thu, Jan 11 2018 at 2:46am -0500,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> wrote:

> On 01/11/2018 03:12 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/block/blk-sysfs.c b/block/blk-sysfs.c
> > index 870484eaed1f..2395122875b4 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-sysfs.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-sysfs.c
> > @@ -929,6 +930,9 @@ void blk_unregister_queue(struct gendisk *disk)
> > if (WARN_ON(!q))
> > return;
> >
> > + if (!test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_REGISTERED, &disk->queue->queue_flags))
> > + return;
> > +
> > mutex_lock(&q->sysfs_lock);
> > queue_flag_clear_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_REGISTERED, q);
> > mutex_unlock(&q->sysfs_lock);
> Why can't we use test_and_clear_bit() here?
> Shouldn't that relieve the need for the mutex_lock() here, too?

FYI, I looked at this and then got concerned with it enough to chat with
Mikulas (cc'd) about it, here is what he said:

11:54 <mikulas> if (!test_and_clear_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_REGISTERED, &q->queue_flags))
11:55 <mikulas> this is buggy - the operation test_and_clear_bit is atomic - but if it races with some non-atomic read-modify-write operation on q->queue_flags, then the atomic modification would be lost
11:56 <mikulas> you must use always atomic accesses on q->queue_flags or always non-atomic accesses inside a mutex
11:56 <mikulas> queue_flag_clear_unlocked uses non-atomic __clear_bit
11:57 <mikulas> other functions in include/linux/blkdev.h also use non-atomic operations - so you cannot mix them with atomic operations

So my v4, that I'll send out shortly, won't be using test_and_clear_bit()

Thanks,
Mike