linux-block.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
	nbd@other.debian.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] block: don't update BLK_FEAT_POLL in __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 09:05:49 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a3bd231c-0568-4dad-9268-bc7edaace94b@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250108152705.GA24792@lst.de>

On 1/9/25 00:27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 06:31:15PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>>> -	if (!(q->limits.features & BLK_FEAT_POLL) &&
>>> -			(bio->bi_opf & REQ_POLLED)) {
>>> +	if ((bio->bi_opf & REQ_POLLED) && !bdev_can_poll(bdev)) {
>>
>> submit_bio_noacct() is called without grabbing .q_usage_counter,
>> so tagset may be freed now, then use-after-free on q->tag_set?
> 
> Indeed.  That also means the previous check wasn't reliable either.
> I think we can simple move the check into
> blk_mq_submit_bio/__submit_bio which means we'll do a bunch more
> checks before we eventually fail, but otherwise it'll work the
> same.

Given that the request queue is the same for all tag sets, I do not think we
need to have the queue_limits_start_update()/commit_update() within the tag set
loop in __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues(). So something like this should be enough
for an initial fix, no ?

diff --git a/block/blk-mq.c b/block/blk-mq.c
index 8ac19d4ae3c0..ac71e9cee25b 100644
--- a/block/blk-mq.c
+++ b/block/blk-mq.c
@@ -4986,6 +4986,7 @@ static void __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues(struct
blk_mq_tag_set *set,
                                                        int nr_hw_queues)
 {
        struct request_queue *q;
+       struct queue_limits lim;
        LIST_HEAD(head);
        int prev_nr_hw_queues = set->nr_hw_queues;
        int i;
@@ -4999,8 +5000,10 @@ static void __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues(struct
blk_mq_tag_set *set,
        if (set->nr_maps == 1 && nr_hw_queues == set->nr_hw_queues)
                return;

+       lim = queue_limits_start_update(q);
        list_for_each_entry(q, &set->tag_list, tag_set_list)
                blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
+
        /*
         * Switch IO scheduler to 'none', cleaning up the data associated
         * with the previous scheduler. We will switch back once we are done
@@ -5036,13 +5039,10 @@ static void __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues(struct
blk_mq_tag_set *set,
                        set->nr_hw_queues = prev_nr_hw_queues;
                        goto fallback;
                }
-               lim = queue_limits_start_update(q);
                if (blk_mq_can_poll(set))
                        lim.features |= BLK_FEAT_POLL;
                else
                        lim.features &= ~BLK_FEAT_POLL;
-               if (queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim) < 0)
-                       pr_warn("updating the poll flag failed\n");
                blk_mq_map_swqueue(q);
        }

@@ -5059,6 +5059,9 @@ static void __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues(struct
blk_mq_tag_set *set,
        list_for_each_entry(q, &set->tag_list, tag_set_list)
                blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);

+       if (queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim) < 0)
+               pr_warn("updating the poll flag failed\n");
+
        /* Free the excess tags when nr_hw_queues shrink. */
        for (i = set->nr_hw_queues; i < prev_nr_hw_queues; i++)
                __blk_mq_free_map_and_rqs(set, i);

With that, no modification of the hot path to check the poll feature should be
needed. And I also fail to see why we need to do the queue freeze for all tag
sets. Once should be enough as well...

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2025-01-09  0:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-01-08  9:24 fix queue freeze and limit locking order v2 Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08  9:24 ` [PATCH 01/10] block: fix docs for freezing of queue limits updates Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:19   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-13  7:19   ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-01-08  9:24 ` [PATCH 02/10] block: add a queue_limits_commit_update_frozen helper Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:20   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-13  7:20   ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 03/10] block: don't update BLK_FEAT_POLL in __blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:17   ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-08 10:31   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08 15:27     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-09  0:05       ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2025-01-09  2:18         ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08 10:54   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-01-13  7:23   ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 04/10] block: add a store_limit operations for sysfs entries Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:33   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-13  7:24   ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 05/10] block: fix queue freeze vs limits lock order in sysfs store methods Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:18   ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-08 10:38   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08 15:29     ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-13  7:25   ` Hannes Reinecke
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 06/10] nvme: fix queue freeze vs limits lock order Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:39   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 07/10] nbd: " Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:40   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 08/10] usb-storage: " Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:41   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 09/10] loop: refactor queue limits updates Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:20   ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-08 10:42   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08 10:56   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-01-08  9:25 ` [PATCH 10/10] loop: fix queue freeze vs limits lock order Christoph Hellwig
2025-01-08 10:20   ` Damien Le Moal
2025-01-08 10:44   ` Ming Lei
2025-01-08 10:57   ` Nilay Shroff
2025-01-08 10:51 ` fix queue freeze and limit locking order v2 Johannes Thumshirn

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=a3bd231c-0568-4dad-9268-bc7edaace94b@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=nbd@other.debian.org \
    --cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=usb-storage@lists.one-eyed-alien.net \
    /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).