From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "block: WARN in __blk_put_request() for potential bio leak" Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:45:14 +0300 Message-ID: <4A2F729A.1060101@panasas.com> References: <4A2E645F.9090008@panasas.com> <20090610080039B.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <4A2F6B8E.8060700@panasas.com> <20090610172956C.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ip67-152-220-66.z220-152-67.customer.algx.net ([67.152.220.66]:7548 "EHLO daytona.int.panasas.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757669AbZFJIpO (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2009 04:45:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090610172956C.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: FUJITA Tomonori Cc: jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com On 06/10/2009 11:29 AM, FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:15:10 +0300 > Boaz Harrosh wrote: >> That is a violation of block API. All block drivers must call >> blk_end_request(). > > Where can I find a documentation about it? > No documentation > If not, can you stop claiming a new rule? > The fact that ALL block drivers call it for proper service of ALL ULDS, does it not make it a rule? > If you want to propose a new rule, you need to fix the existing users > first. > Sorry I missed them. I couldn't even imagine that there will be any. Will send patches, sorry. > >> If they do not, then they can not for example be >> called from inside Kernel. They relay on special bsg behavior >> that always uses map_user. > > Of course, we send SMP requests only via BSG. SMP is the first reason > why we invented BSG. > Of course what? Show me the big fat comment that says: only use from BSG!!! other wise broken block driver. > > > You don't need SAS hardware to play with blk_rq_map_user() and > blk_rq_unmap_user(). All you need to do is writing a module that play > with these functions. > > >> I do believe you that there is no leak, I just want to understand why? >> And any way, all "BSG SMP" drivers must be fixed to call blk_end_request(). >> They can not be dependent on the specific ULD that calls them. Boaz