From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Konstantin Baydarov <kbaidarov@ru.mvista.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: generic_unplug_device implicitly makes irq enable
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 16:30:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070508143019.GY4163@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070508170759.1c66352a@windmill.dev.rtsoft.ru>
On Tue, May 08 2007, Konstantin Baydarov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while working on LKCD I found out common block device issue.
> LKCD uses generic_unplug_device() to finish disk IO in case of blockdev kernel core dump.
> I found out that after calling of generic_unplug_device() IRQs become implicitly enabled (it is supposed that IRQs are disabled).
> I looked at generic_unplug_device() code and found out that function lose state of irq flags, it use spin_lock_irq()/spin_unlock_irq() instead of spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore():
> void generic_unplug_device(request_queue_t *q)
> {
> spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> __generic_unplug_device(q);
> spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> }
>
> generic_unplug_device() - is a method to unplug the block device, named unplug_fn in struct request_queue.
> I've compared generic_unplug_device() with other methods:
> file drivers/md/raid5.c ...
> static void raid5_unplug_device(request_queue_t *q)
> {
> mddev_t *mddev = q->queuedata;
> raid5_conf_t *conf = mddev_to_conf(mddev);
> unsigned long flags;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&conf->device_lock, flags);
>
> if (blk_remove_plug(q)) {
> conf->seq_flush++;
> raid5_activate_delayed(conf);
> }
> md_wakeup_thread(mddev->thread);
>
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&conf->device_lock, flags);
>
> unplug_slaves(mddev);
> }
>
> file drivers/block/umem.c ...
> static void mm_unplug_device(request_queue_t *q)
> {
> struct cardinfo *card = q->queuedata;
> unsigned long flags;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&card->lock, flags);
> if (blk_remove_plug(q))
> activate(card);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&card->lock, flags);
> }
>
> As you can see raid5_unplug_device() and mm_unplug_device() are using
> spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore(), instead of spin_lock_irq()/spin_unlock_irq().
> I found out that generic_unplug_device() is used not only in LKCD, so I suggest to switch generic_unplug_device() to spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore() to prevent implicitly losing of IRQ flags.
> Here is patch against kernel 2.6.21.1.
> Please CC me to answers/comments.
> Thanks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Baydarov <kbaidarov@ru.mvista.com>
>
> block/ll_rw_blk.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.21.1/block/ll_rw_blk.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.21.1.orig/block/ll_rw_blk.c
> +++ linux-2.6.21.1/block/ll_rw_blk.c
> @@ -1602,9 +1602,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__generic_unplug_device);
> **/
> void generic_unplug_device(request_queue_t *q)
> {
> - spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(q->queue_lock, flags);
> __generic_unplug_device(q);
> - spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(q->queue_lock, flags);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_unplug_device);
The patch is not correct, some ->request_fn() functions may sleep. So
it's illegal to call generic_unlug_device() with interrupts disabled in
the first place, which is why spin_lock_irq() is used instead of the
flags saving variant.
So it looks like you need to fix your caller instead.
--
Jens Axboe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-08 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-08 13:07 [PATCH] block: generic_unplug_device implicitly makes irq enable Konstantin Baydarov
2007-05-08 14:30 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
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=20070508143019.GY4163@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=kbaidarov@ru.mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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