From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
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 12:35:36 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ae75194f-334f-4337-b1e6-e68b8d63bc93@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z3tOn4C5i096owJc@fedora>
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.
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-06 3:36 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 [this message]
2025-01-06 3:40 ` Ming Lei
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=ae75194f-334f-4337-b1e6-e68b8d63bc93@kernel.org \
--to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--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).