From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sg-1-12.ptr.blmpb.com (sg-1-12.ptr.blmpb.com [118.26.132.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 066CC23C51D for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2026 16:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=118.26.132.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768321389; cv=none; b=TJhf2NZYpgX6s/XntlTEgjnwchquMMJaxrCseiv4gPrUDT8TycFlL38tf+bSW7m3Tt8nb9ZDC9OR5V1yqYyMDwB0HxIvvnNrbFnDccvd9lFa/rf7cl18bQcsIo2xMASaBVYQL7wT/0EzHo+EbZpj6l5lM5j+oz+7nrF2NLHZHUU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768321389; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7CfmFoq7I+S+WiQ8cKHFUDPldkcAOfFOZIawspnCLpU=; h=Subject:In-Reply-To:Cc:Message-Id:Date:Content-Disposition: Content-Type:To:From:References:Mime-Version; b=SvMgForbszZ1/HkJMbiXuXnuLc0tCMWUSNIEt2uxFAKGZMwe2fyx7h1vVfhNI8JICpEzRddBhlY+IpDTXNDQhBGiNuSrijYlj5z3B9Ks4CseHSyTvf8n7e2F4+ZtkZtgOvub8/nCIPGsJRYpPKREQ1BG5QGP88uf0Vzts/2gflI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fnnas.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fnnas.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.i=@fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.b=aWv/852N; arc=none smtp.client-ip=118.26.132.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=fnnas.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fnnas.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.i=@fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn header.b="aWv/852N" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=s1; d=fnnas-com.20200927.dkim.feishu.cn; t=1768321380; h=from:subject:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc: reply-to:content-type:mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=bNq/lYaLdIPww6NNywM9E7Dj+tufsVWAHsCFwcVSWE0=; b=aWv/852N0/KT9ny1ITMaYCyE0Zs/MDQvXxCRbFOY+ruSKMPOofviGwJbJeFLLdjx86ddQ9 i2i3EofcaOugvyqyfecQOt1VwuhEDgte04Mzv2J6DKCvEyv4u7Gk/NlhnpBnTp5CbWlE5w hS60xsMi47wGDd577xUyBYXYLr5hRg8QFVodBKUPgZdS60JESWHuQfwu17y0quWJgx5Sqn s/BLpGXPPdyVya3JNITRxRz45kpLCuBzZt896YUolV0OYUOss2CNjCqMC3Qb9EtkWBv7sZ cVWHAKKnW2P0nS1V8erGT29qNc05QFosiVsrC68J5Jd9GMaVjEifBj3pRbNx3Q== Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "bcache: fix improper use of bi_end_io" In-Reply-To: Received: from studio.local ([120.245.64.3]) by smtp.feishu.cn with ESMTPS; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 00:22:58 +0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , , "Shida Zhang" , "Kent Overstreet" Message-Id: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 00:22:56 +0800 X-Lms-Return-Path: Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 To: "Christoph Hellwig" From: "Coly Li" References: <20260113060940.46489-1-colyli@fnnas.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Original-From: Coly Li On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 12:07:54AM +0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 02:09:39PM +0800, colyli@fnnas.com wrote: > > From: Coly Li > > > > This reverts commit 53280e398471f0bddbb17b798a63d41264651325. > > > > The above commit tries to address the race in bio chain handling, > > but it seems in detached_dev_end_io() simply using bio_endio() to > > replace bio->bi_end_io() may introduce potential regression. > > > > This patch revert the commit, let's wait for better fix from Shida. > > That's a pretty vague commit message for reverting a clear API > violation that has caused trouble. What is the story here? > The discussion happens in stable mailing list. Also I admitted my fault. Though I didn't ack commit 53280e398471 ("bcache: fix improper use of bi_end_io"), I read it and overlooked the bio_endio() duplicated entry issue. Coly Li