linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>, axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de
Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/6] bio_split() error handling rework
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:43:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3cbc01c-e314-4df1-bf0c-b69bdcd638f7@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86f3586d-5b0a-483e-b94b-d4515d5c5244@oracle.com>

On 9/23/24 09:19, John Garry wrote:
> On 23/09/2024 06:53, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 9/19/24 11:22, John Garry wrote:
>>> bio_split() error handling could be improved as follows:
>>> - Instead of returning NULL for an error - which is vague - return a
>>>    PTR_ERR, which may hint what went wrong.
>>> - Remove BUG_ON() calls - which are generally not preferred - and 
>>> instead
>>>    WARN and pass an error code back to the caller. Many callers of
>>>    bio_split() don't check the return code. As such, for an error we 
>>> would
>>>    be getting a crash still from an invalid pointer dereference.
>>>
>>> Most bio_split() callers don't check the return value. However, it could
>>> be argued the bio_split() calls should not fail. So far I have just
>>> fixed up the md RAID code to handle these errors, as that is my interest
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Sending as an RFC as unsure if this is the right direction.
>>>
>>> The motivator for this series was initial md RAID atomic write 
>>> support in
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/21f19b4b-4b83-4ca2- 
>>> a93b-0a433741fd26@oracle.com/
>>>
>>> There I wanted to ensure that we don't split an atomic write bio, and it
>>> made more sense to handle this in bio_split() (instead of the 
>>> bio_split()
>>> caller).
>>>
>>> John Garry (6):
>>>    block: Rework bio_split() return value
>>>    block: Error an attempt to split an atomic write in bio_split()
>>>    block: Handle bio_split() errors in bio_submit_split()
>>>    md/raid0: Handle bio_split() errors
>>>    md/raid1: Handle bio_split() errors
>>>    md/raid10: Handle bio_split() errors
>>>
>>>   block/bio.c                 | 14 ++++++++++----
>>>   block/blk-crypto-fallback.c |  2 +-
>>>   block/blk-merge.c           |  5 +++++
>>>   drivers/md/raid0.c          | 10 ++++++++++
>>>   drivers/md/raid1.c          |  8 ++++++++
>>>   drivers/md/raid10.c         | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>   6 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>> You are missing '__bio_split_to_limits()' which looks as it would need 
>> to be modified, too.
>>
> 
> In __bio_split_to_limits(), for REQ_OP_DISCARD, REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE, and 
> REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES, we indirectly call bio_split(). And bio_split() 
> might error. But functions like bio_split_discard() can return NULL for 
> cases where a split is not required. So I suppose we need to check 
> IS_ERR(split) for those request types mentioned. For NULL being 
> returned, we would still have the __bio_split_to_limits() is "if 
> (split)" check.
> 
Indeed. And then you'll need to modify nvme:

diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c b/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
index f72c5a6a2d8e..c99f51e7730e 100644
--- a/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
+++ b/drivers/nvme/host/multipath.c
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ static void nvme_ns_head_submit_bio(struct bio *bio)
          * pool from the original queue to allocate the bvecs from.
          */
         bio = bio_split_to_limits(bio);
-       if (!bio)
+       if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(bio))
                 return;

         srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&head->srcu);

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                  Kernel Storage Architect
hare@suse.de                                +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Frankenstr. 146, 90461 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: I. Totev, A. McDonald, W. Knoblich


  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-23  9:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-19  9:22 [PATCH RFC 0/6] bio_split() error handling rework John Garry
2024-09-19  9:22 ` [PATCH RFC 1/6] block: Rework bio_split() return value John Garry
2024-09-19 15:50   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2024-09-23  7:27     ` John Garry
2024-09-20 14:07   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-19  9:22 ` [PATCH RFC 2/6] block: Error an attempt to split an atomic write in bio_split() John Garry
2024-09-19  9:22 ` [PATCH RFC 3/6] block: Handle bio_split() errors in bio_submit_split() John Garry
2024-09-20 14:09   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-23 10:33     ` John Garry
2024-09-19  9:23 ` [PATCH RFC 4/6] md/raid0: Handle bio_split() errors John Garry
2024-09-20 14:10   ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-09-19  9:23 ` [PATCH RFC 5/6] md/raid1: " John Garry
2024-09-20  6:58   ` Yu Kuai
2024-09-20 10:04     ` John Garry
2024-09-23  6:15       ` Yu Kuai
2024-09-23  7:44         ` John Garry
2024-09-23  8:18           ` Yu Kuai
2024-09-23  9:21             ` John Garry
2024-09-23  9:38               ` Yu Kuai
2024-09-23 10:40                 ` John Garry
2024-10-23 11:16                 ` John Garry
2024-10-23 11:46                   ` Geoff Back
2024-10-23 12:11                     ` John Garry
2024-10-24  2:10                       ` Yu Kuai
2024-10-24  8:57                         ` John Garry
2024-10-24  9:12                           ` Yu Kuai
2024-10-24  9:56                             ` John Garry
2024-10-25  1:39                               ` Yu Kuai
2024-10-23 11:21         ` John Garry
2024-10-24  3:08           ` Yu Kuai
2024-10-24 13:51             ` John Garry
2024-10-25  1:24               ` Yu Kuai
2024-09-19  9:23 ` [PATCH RFC 6/6] md/raid10: " John Garry
2024-09-23  5:53 ` [PATCH RFC 0/6] bio_split() error handling rework Hannes Reinecke
2024-09-23  7:19   ` John Garry
2024-09-23  9:43     ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2024-09-23 10:21       ` 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=b3cbc01c-e314-4df1-bf0c-b69bdcd638f7@suse.de \
    --to=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).