From: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
To: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-v2 1/4] target: Fix multi task->task_sg[] chaining logic bug
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:27:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DD2E846.6090009@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1305088535-27486-2-git-send-email-nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Acked-by: Kiran Patil <kiran.patil@intel.com>
On 5/10/2011 9:35 PM, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> From: Nicholas Bellinger<nab@linux-iscsi.org>
>
> This patch fixes a bug in transport_do_task_sg_chain() used by HW target
> mode modules with sg_chain() to provide a single sg_next() walkable memory
> layout for use with pci_map_sg() and friends. This patch addresses an
> issue with mapping multiple small block max_sector tasks across multiple
> struct se_task->task_sg[] mappings for HW target mode operation.
>
> This was causing OOPs with (cmd->t_task->t_tasks_no> 1) I/O traffic for
> HW target drivers using transport_do_task_sg_chain(), and has been tested
> so far with tcm_fc(openfcoe), tcm_qla2xxx, and ib_srpt fabrics with
> t_tasks_no> 1 IBLOCK backends using a smaller max_sectors to trigger the
> original issue.
>
> Reported-by: Kiran Patil<kiran.patil@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Bellinger<nab@linux-iscsi.org>
> ---
> drivers/target/target_core_transport.c | 26 +++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> index 9583b23..fefe10a 100644
> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_transport.c
> @@ -4776,18 +4776,20 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> sg_end_cur->page_link&= ~0x02;
>
> sg_chain(sg_head, task_sg_num, sg_head_cur);
> - sg_count += (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> - } else
> sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> + } else {
> + sg_chain(sg_head, task_sg_num, sg_head_cur);
> + sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> + }
>
> sg_head = sg_head_cur;
> sg_link = sg_link_cur;
> - task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> continue;
> }
> sg_head = sg_first =&task->task_sg[0];
> sg_link =&task->task_sg[task->task_sg_num];
> - task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> /*
> * Check for single task..
> */
> @@ -4798,9 +4800,12 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> */
> sg_end =&task->task_sg[task->task_sg_num - 1];
> sg_end->page_link&= ~0x02;
> - sg_count += (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> - } else
> sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = (task->task_sg_num + 1);
> + } else {
> + sg_count += task->task_sg_num;
> + task_sg_num = task->task_sg_num;
> + }
> }
> /*
> * Setup the starting pointer and total t_tasks_sg_linked_no including
> @@ -4809,21 +4814,20 @@ void transport_do_task_sg_chain(struct se_cmd *cmd)
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained = sg_first;
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no = sg_count;
>
> - DEBUG_CMD_M("Setup T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained: %p and"
> - " t_tasks_sg_chained_no: %u\n", T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained,
> + DEBUG_CMD_M("Setup cmd: %p T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained: %p and"
> + " t_tasks_sg_chained_no: %u\n", cmd, T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained,
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no);
>
> for_each_sg(T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained, sg,
> T_TASK(cmd)->t_tasks_sg_chained_no, i) {
>
> - DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p page: %p length: %d offset: %d\n",
> - sg, sg_page(sg), sg->length, sg->offset);
> + DEBUG_CMD_M("SG[%d]: %p page: %p length: %d offset: %d, magic: 0x%08x\n",
> + i, sg, sg_page(sg), sg->length, sg->offset, sg->sg_magic);
> if (sg_is_chain(sg))
> DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p sg_is_chain=1\n", sg);
> if (sg_is_last(sg))
> DEBUG_CMD_M("SG: %p sg_is_last=1\n", sg);
> }
> -
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(transport_do_task_sg_chain);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-11 4:35 [PATCH-v2 0/4] Bugfixes for .39-rc8 Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 1/4] target: Fix multi task->task_sg[] chaining logic bug Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-17 21:27 ` Kiran Patil [this message]
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 2/4] target: Fix interrupt context bug with stats_lock and core_tmr_alloc_req Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 3/4] target: Fix bug with task_sg chained transport_free_dev_tasks release Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-11 4:35 ` [PATCH-v2 4/4] target: Fix task->task_execute_queue=1 clear bug + LUN_RESET OOPs Nicholas A. Bellinger
2011-05-14 0:05 ` [PATCH-v2 0/4] Bugfixes for .39-rc8 Nicholas A. Bellinger
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=4DD2E846.6090009@intel.com \
--to=kiran.patil@intel.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).