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
next prev parent 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).