From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bart Van Assche Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] block: Fix race on request_queue.end_io invocations Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:44:36 +0000 Message-ID: <4FCF50B4.6000701@acm.org> References: <4FCE3D20.4000205@acm.org> <4FCE3D77.8040909@acm.org> <20120605213248.GB3700@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from relay03ant.iops.be ([212.53.5.218]:57962 "EHLO relay03ant.iops.be" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751146Ab2FFMoo (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:44:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20120605213248.GB3700@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-scsi , James Bottomley , Mike Christie , Jun'ichi Nomura , Stefan Richter , Jens Axboe On 06/05/12 21:32, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 05:10:15PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> Some request_queue.end_io implementations can be called safely >> without the queue lock held while several other implementations >> assume that the queue lock is held. So let's play it safe and >> make sure that the queue lock is held around end_io invocations. >> Found this through source code review. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche >> Cc: Jens Axboe >> Cc: Tejun Heo >> Cc: > > Acked-by: Tejun Heo > > Not sure about stable@ tho. This doesn't fix any visible issue at the > moment and any change carries some risk. I don't have a strong opinion about cc-ing stable - leaving out that tag is fine for me. Bart.