Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, song@kernel.org, yukuai3@huawei.com, hch@lst.de
Cc: martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] block: Rework bio_split() return value
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:16:41 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7df194bf-a5e3-4ec9-928b-67c68eb48eae@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c3102f97-df59-4859-9af1-d241a357d02f@suse.de>

On 05/11/2024 07:21, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 10/31/24 10:59, John Garry wrote:
>> Instead of returning an inconclusive value of NULL for an error in 
>> calling
>> bio_split(), return a ERR_PTR() always.
>>
>> Also remove the BUG_ON() calls, and WARN_ON_ONCE() instead. Indeed, since
>> almost all callers don't check the return code from bio_split(), we'll
>> crash anyway (for those failures).
>>
>> Fix up the only user which checks bio_split() return code today (directly
>> or indirectly), blk_crypto_fallback_split_bio_if_needed(). The md/bcache
>> code does check the return code in cached_dev_cache_miss() ->
>> bio_next_split() -> bio_split(), but only to see if there was a split, so
>> there would be no change in behaviour here (when returning a ERR_PTR()).
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@wdc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>   block/bio.c                 | 10 ++++++----
>>   block/blk-crypto-fallback.c |  2 +-
>>   2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/bio.c b/block/bio.c
>> index 95e2ee14cea2..7a93724e4a49 100644
>> --- a/block/bio.c
>> +++ b/block/bio.c
>> @@ -1740,16 +1740,18 @@ struct bio *bio_split(struct bio *bio, int 
>> sectors,
>>   {
>>       struct bio *split;
>> -    BUG_ON(sectors <= 0);
>> -    BUG_ON(sectors >= bio_sectors(bio));
>> +    if (WARN_ON_ONCE(sectors <= 0))
>> +        return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> +    if (WARN_ON_ONCE(sectors >= bio_sectors(bio)))
>> +        return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>>       /* Zone append commands cannot be split */
>>       if (WARN_ON_ONCE(bio_op(bio) == REQ_OP_ZONE_APPEND))
>> -        return NULL;
>> +        return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>>       split = bio_alloc_clone(bio->bi_bdev, bio, gfp, bs);
>>       if (!split)
>> -        return NULL;
>> +        return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>       split->bi_iter.bi_size = sectors << 9;
>> diff --git a/block/blk-crypto-fallback.c b/block/blk-crypto-fallback.c
>> index b1e7415f8439..29a205482617 100644
>> --- a/block/blk-crypto-fallback.c
>> +++ b/block/blk-crypto-fallback.c
>> @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ static bool 
>> blk_crypto_fallback_split_bio_if_needed(struct bio **bio_ptr)
>>           split_bio = bio_split(bio, num_sectors, GFP_NOIO,
>>                         &crypto_bio_split);
>> -        if (!split_bio) {
>> +        if (IS_ERR(split_bio)) {
>>               bio->bi_status = BLK_STS_RESOURCE;
>>               return false;
>>           }
> 
> Don't you need to modify block/bounce.c, too?

Today we have __blk_queue_bounce() -> bio_split(), but the return value 
from bio_split() is not checked for errors (NULL) there, so it is 
already in a poor state.

I will look to remedy that and other callsites which don't check 
bio_split() return value for errors in next phase.

Thanks,
John

  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-05 17:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-31  9:59 [PATCH v3 0/6] bio_split() error handling rework John Garry
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] block: Rework bio_split() return value John Garry
2024-11-05  7:21   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-11-05 17:16     ` John Garry [this message]
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] block: Error an attempt to split an atomic write in bio_split() John Garry
2024-11-05  7:22   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] block: Handle bio_split() errors in bio_submit_split() John Garry
2024-11-05  7:23   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] md/raid0: Handle bio_split() errors John Garry
2024-11-05  7:24   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] md/raid1: " John Garry
2024-10-31 11:07   ` Yu Kuai
2024-11-05  7:26   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-10-31  9:59 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] md/raid10: " John Garry
2024-10-31 11:11   ` Yu Kuai
2024-11-05  7:27   ` Hannes Reinecke
2024-11-07  6:49 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] bio_split() error handling rework John Garry
2024-11-07  6:49 ` John Garry
2024-11-07 18:27   ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-07 19:54     ` John Garry

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=7df194bf-a5e3-4ec9-928b-67c68eb48eae@oracle.com \
    --to=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Thumshirn@wdc.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    /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