From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [md PATCH 06/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access during reshape.
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 16:19:52 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160602061952.2939.22226.stgit@noble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160602061319.2939.72280.stgit@noble>
mirrors[].rdev can become NULL at any point unless:
- a counted reference is held
- ->reconfig_mutex is held, or
- rcu_read_lock() is held
Reshape isn't always suitably careful as in the past rdev couldn't be
removed during reshape. It can now, so add protection.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/md/raid10.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
index f6f21a253926..588cf6544f07 100644
--- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
@@ -4352,15 +4352,16 @@ read_more:
blist = read_bio;
read_bio->bi_next = NULL;
+ rcu_read_lock();
for (s = 0; s < conf->copies*2; s++) {
struct bio *b;
int d = r10_bio->devs[s/2].devnum;
struct md_rdev *rdev2;
if (s&1) {
- rdev2 = conf->mirrors[d].replacement;
+ rdev2 = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].replacement);
b = r10_bio->devs[s/2].repl_bio;
} else {
- rdev2 = conf->mirrors[d].rdev;
+ rdev2 = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].rdev);
b = r10_bio->devs[s/2].bio;
}
if (!rdev2 || test_bit(Faulty, &rdev2->flags))
@@ -4405,6 +4406,7 @@ read_more:
nr_sectors += len >> 9;
}
bio_full:
+ rcu_read_unlock();
r10_bio->sectors = nr_sectors;
/* Now submit the read */
@@ -4456,16 +4458,20 @@ static void reshape_request_write(struct mddev *mddev, struct r10bio *r10_bio)
struct bio *b;
int d = r10_bio->devs[s/2].devnum;
struct md_rdev *rdev;
+ rcu_read_lock();
if (s&1) {
- rdev = conf->mirrors[d].replacement;
+ rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].replacement);
b = r10_bio->devs[s/2].repl_bio;
} else {
- rdev = conf->mirrors[d].rdev;
+ rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].rdev);
b = r10_bio->devs[s/2].bio;
}
- if (!rdev || test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags))
+ if (!rdev || test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
+ rcu_read_unlock();
continue;
+ }
atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
md_sync_acct(b->bi_bdev, r10_bio->sectors);
atomic_inc(&r10_bio->remaining);
b->bi_next = NULL;
@@ -4526,9 +4532,10 @@ static int handle_reshape_read_error(struct mddev *mddev,
if (s > (PAGE_SIZE >> 9))
s = PAGE_SIZE >> 9;
+ rcu_read_lock();
while (!success) {
int d = r10b->devs[slot].devnum;
- struct md_rdev *rdev = conf->mirrors[d].rdev;
+ struct md_rdev *rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].rdev);
sector_t addr;
if (rdev == NULL ||
test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags) ||
@@ -4536,11 +4543,15 @@ static int handle_reshape_read_error(struct mddev *mddev,
goto failed;
addr = r10b->devs[slot].addr + idx * PAGE_SIZE;
+ atomic_inc(&rdev->nr_pending);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
success = sync_page_io(rdev,
addr,
s << 9,
bvec[idx].bv_page,
READ, false);
+ rdev_dec_pending(rdev, mddev);
+ rcu_read_lock();
if (success)
break;
failed:
@@ -4550,6 +4561,7 @@ static int handle_reshape_read_error(struct mddev *mddev,
if (slot == first_slot)
break;
}
+ rcu_read_unlock();
if (!success) {
/* couldn't read this block, must give up */
set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR,
@@ -4619,16 +4631,18 @@ static void raid10_finish_reshape(struct mddev *mddev)
}
} else {
int d;
+ rcu_read_lock();
for (d = conf->geo.raid_disks ;
d < conf->geo.raid_disks - mddev->delta_disks;
d++) {
- struct md_rdev *rdev = conf->mirrors[d].rdev;
+ struct md_rdev *rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].rdev);
if (rdev)
clear_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags);
- rdev = conf->mirrors[d].replacement;
+ rdev = rcu_dereference(conf->mirrors[d].replacement);
if (rdev)
clear_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags);
}
+ rcu_read_unlock();
}
mddev->layout = mddev->new_layout;
mddev->chunk_sectors = 1 << conf->geo.chunk_shift;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 6:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-02 6:19 [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 14/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in want_replace NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 10/18] md/raid1: small cleanup in raid1_end_read/write_request NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 03/18] md/raid10: fix refounct imbalance when resyncing an array with a replacement device NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 16/18] md/multipath: add rcu protection to rdev access in multipath_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 05/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection to rdev access in raid10_sync_request NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:33 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:46 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-10 16:22 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 02/18] md/raid1, raid10: don't recheck "Faulty" flag in read-balance NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 13/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in handle_failed_sync NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 15/18] md/raid5: add rcu protection to rdev accesses in raid5_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 11/18] md/raid1: small code cleanup in end_sync_write NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 12/18] md/raid1: add rcu protection to rdev in fix_read_error NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 04/18] md/raid10: add rcu protection in raid10_status NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 07/18] md/raid10: minor code improvement in fix_read_error() NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 09/18] md/raid10: stop print_conf from being too verbose NeilBrown
2016-06-02 18:47 ` John Stoffel
2016-06-02 22:48 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:39 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:47 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 08/18] md/raid10: simplify print_conf a little NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 01/18] md: disconnect device from personality before trying to remove it NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:31 ` Shaohua Li
2016-06-10 6:40 ` NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 18/18] md: reduce the number of synchronize_rcu() calls when multiple devices fail NeilBrown
2016-06-02 6:19 ` [md PATCH 17/18] md: be extra careful not to take a reference to a Faulty device NeilBrown
2016-06-03 22:28 ` [md PATCH 00/18] Assorted minor fixes, particularly RCU protection Shaohua Li
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=20160602061952.2939.22226.stgit@noble \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
/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).