From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@parallels.com>,
"linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [GIT PULL] Queue free fix (was Re: [PATCH] block: Free queue resources at blk_release_queue())
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:14:42 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E832BD2.50409@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1317219074.19034.4.camel@dabdike.hansenpartnership.com>
On 2011-09-28 08:11, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 08:08 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 2011-09-27 22:10, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-09-27 at 18:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But if you forward the actual patch to me (the one I see on lkml seems
>>>>>> to be broken and doesn't compile cleanly because it's assiging a
>>>>>> structure to a pointer), I'll try it out anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, that would be great. It's inlined below.
>>>>
>>>> Well, I did several USB eject events, and nothing bad happened.
>>>>
>>>> But as mentioned, I don't think that means much. Have you tried this
>>>> with slub debugging and poisoning? It might be worth some extra
>>>> testing that way.
>>>
>>> I've been testing a simpler version:
>>>
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=131300594629839
>>>
>>> For a long time now with great success. The only difference is the
>>> locking cleanup, but SCSI doesn't need that since it doesn't supply its
>>> own lock, so I've been voting for this as the final fix for a while now.
>>
>> The locking cleanup looks good, though, for devices that do use the
>> embedded lock.
>
> Exactly ... it's the missing piece; without it my patch is really only
> addressing SCSI.
>
>> But functionally they should be the same for SCSI, so if
>> you had great success with it, then that's a good data point.
>
> Right, I've run it through the memory debugger and USB ejection testing
> (with ext2, which seems to be the fs that triggers this problem the
> most).
Alright, lets call this fully tested and fixed then. Linus, I committed
it, please pull:
git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-linus
Hannes Reinecke (1):
block: Free queue resources at blk_release_queue()
block/blk-core.c | 13 ++++++-------
block/blk-sysfs.c | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index b2ed78a..d34433a 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -348,9 +348,10 @@ void blk_put_queue(struct request_queue *q)
EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_put_queue);
/*
- * Note: If a driver supplied the queue lock, it should not zap that lock
- * unexpectedly as some queue cleanup components like elevator_exit() and
- * blk_throtl_exit() need queue lock.
+ * Note: If a driver supplied the queue lock, it is disconnected
+ * by this function. The actual state of the lock doesn't matter
+ * here as the request_queue isn't accessible after this point
+ * (QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD is set) and no other requests will be queued.
*/
void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
{
@@ -367,10 +368,8 @@ void blk_cleanup_queue(struct request_queue *q)
queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_DEAD, q);
mutex_unlock(&q->sysfs_lock);
- if (q->elevator)
- elevator_exit(q->elevator);
-
- blk_throtl_exit(q);
+ if (q->queue_lock != &q->__queue_lock)
+ q->queue_lock = &q->__queue_lock;
blk_put_queue(q);
}
diff --git a/block/blk-sysfs.c b/block/blk-sysfs.c
index e681805..60fda88 100644
--- a/block/blk-sysfs.c
+++ b/block/blk-sysfs.c
@@ -479,6 +479,11 @@ static void blk_release_queue(struct kobject *kobj)
blk_sync_queue(q);
+ if (q->elevator)
+ elevator_exit(q->elevator);
+
+ blk_throtl_exit(q);
+
if (rl->rq_pool)
mempool_destroy(rl->rq_pool);
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-28 14:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-22 13:18 [PATCH] block: Free queue resources at blk_release_queue() Hannes Reinecke
2011-09-28 0:47 ` Jens Axboe
2011-09-28 0:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 1:15 ` Jens Axboe
2011-09-28 1:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 2:02 ` Jens Axboe
2011-09-28 4:10 ` James Bottomley
2011-09-28 14:08 ` Jens Axboe
2011-09-28 14:11 ` James Bottomley
2011-09-28 14:14 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2011-09-28 15:22 ` [GIT PULL] Queue free fix (was Re: [PATCH] block: Free queue resources at blk_release_queue()) Linus Torvalds
2011-09-28 15:43 ` James Bottomley
2011-09-28 17:48 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-09-28 17:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-28 18:09 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-09-28 18:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-28 19:05 ` Eric Seppanen
2011-09-28 19:14 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-11-30 10:18 ` Jens Axboe
2011-11-30 10:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-09-28 22:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-09-28 17:59 ` James Bottomley
2011-10-13 13:09 ` Steffen Maier
2011-10-14 16:03 ` James Bottomley
2011-10-17 8:46 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-10-17 14:06 ` James Bottomley
2011-10-18 13:31 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-10-18 15:45 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-10-18 16:29 ` James Bottomley
2011-10-31 10:05 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-10-31 10:42 ` James Bottomley
2011-10-31 11:46 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-10-31 13:00 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-02 12:37 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-11-02 12:44 ` Hannes Reinecke
2011-11-02 13:47 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-04 4:07 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-11-04 9:12 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-03 18:25 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-04 9:19 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-04 13:30 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-04 13:37 ` Hannes Reinecke
2011-11-07 11:31 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-11-07 13:42 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-07 12:23 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-07 11:30 ` Jun'ichi Nomura
2011-11-07 15:36 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-07 16:43 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-07 17:10 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-07 21:44 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-09 9:37 ` Hannes Reinecke
2011-11-10 16:10 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-17 16:29 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-29 12:00 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-11-29 20:18 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-11-30 7:25 ` Hannes Reinecke
2011-12-12 12:39 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-12-13 16:50 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-10-31 13:21 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-10-31 13:40 ` Heiko Carstens
2011-10-31 14:01 ` Mike Snitzer
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=4E832BD2.50409@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.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).