linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
	Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
	Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] block: Fix sysfs queue freeze and limits lock order
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:40:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z3tQpt7n-NdSDN13@fedora> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ae75194f-334f-4337-b1e6-e68b8d63bc93@kernel.org>

On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 12:35:36PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 1/6/25 12:31 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 04, 2025 at 10:25:20PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> >> queue_attr_store() always freezes a device queue before calling the
> >> attribute store operation. For attributes that control queue limits, the
> >> store operation will also lock the queue limits with a call to
> >> queue_limits_start_update(). However, some drivers (e.g. SCSI sd) may
> >> need to issue commands to a device to obtain limit values from the
> >> hardware with the queue limits locked. This creates a potential ABBA
> >> deadlock situation if a user attempts to modify a limit (thus freezing
> >> the device queue) while the device driver starts a revalidation of the
> >> device queue limits.
> >>
> >> Avoid such deadlock by introducing the ->store_limit() operation in
> >> struct queue_sysfs_entry and use this operation for all attributes that
> >> modify the device queue limits through the QUEUE_RW_LIMIT_ENTRY() macro
> >> definition. queue_attr_store() is modified to call the ->store_limit()
> >> operation (if it is defined) without the device queue frozen. The device
> >> queue freeze for attributes defining the ->stor_limit() operation is
> >> moved to after the operation completes and is done only around the call
> >> to queue_limits_commit_update().
> >>
> >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v6.9+
> >> Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
> >> ---
> >>  block/blk-sysfs.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
> >>  1 file changed, 64 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/block/blk-sysfs.c b/block/blk-sysfs.c
> >> index 767598e719ab..4fc0020c73a5 100644
> >> --- a/block/blk-sysfs.c
> >> +++ b/block/blk-sysfs.c
> >> @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ struct queue_sysfs_entry {
> >>  	struct attribute attr;
> >>  	ssize_t (*show)(struct gendisk *disk, char *page);
> >>  	ssize_t (*store)(struct gendisk *disk, const char *page, size_t count);
> >> +	ssize_t (*store_limit)(struct gendisk *disk, struct queue_limits *lim,
> >> +			       const char *page, size_t count);
> > 
> > As I mentioned in another thread, freezing queue may not be needed in
> > ->store(), so let's discuss and confirm if it is needed here first.
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/Z3tHozKiUqWr7gjO@fedora/
> > 
> > Also even though freeze is needed, I'd suggest to move freeze in each
> > .store() callback for simplifying & avoiding regression.
> 
> The patch would be simpler, sure. But the code would not be simpler in my
> opinion as we will repeat the freeze+limits commit+unfreeze pattern in several
> callbacks. That is why I made the change to introduce the new store_limit()
> callback to have that pattern in a single place.
> 
> And thinking about it, queue_attr_store() should be better commented to clearly
> describes the locking rules.

The pattern can be enhanced by one new helper or API.

But let's discuss if we really need the pattern first.

IMO, freeze isn't needed in ->store().

Thanks,
Ming


  reply	other threads:[~2025-01-06  3:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-04 13:25 [PATCH 0/3] Fix queue freeze and limit locking order Damien Le Moal
2025-01-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: Fix sysfs queue freeze and limits lock order Damien Le Moal
2025-01-04 16:26   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-01-06  8:27     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  3:31   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-06  3:35     ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-06  3:40       ` Ming Lei [this message]
2025-01-06  8:29     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06 11:15       ` Ming Lei
2025-01-06 15:29         ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-07  0:45           ` Ming Lei
2025-01-07  6:18             ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  8:25   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] block: Fix __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues() " Damien Le Moal
2025-01-06  8:30   ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-06  9:58     ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-06 10:00       ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-04 13:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] nvme: Fix " Damien Le Moal
2025-01-06  8:31   ` Christoph Hellwig

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=Z3tQpt7n-NdSDN13@fedora \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).