linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ctalbott@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] block: reorganize throtl_get_tg() and blk_throtl_bio()
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:19:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111019171917.GA4026@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111019170625.GD25124@google.com>

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:06:25AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:56:22AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > A driver could call blk_cleanup_queue(), mark the queue DEAD and then
> > free the driver provided spin lock. So once queue is DEAD one could
> > not rely on queue lock still being there. That's the reason I did
> > not try to take queue lock again if queue is marked DEAD.
> >
> > Now I see the change that blk_cleanup_queue will start poiting to
> > internal queue lock (Thought it is racy). This will atleast make
> > sure that some spinlock is around. So now this change should be
> > fine.
> 
> The problem with the current code is that all those are not properly
> synchronized.  Drivers shouldn't destroy lock or any other stuff until
> blk_cleanup_queue() is complete and once queue cleanup is done block
> layer shouldn't call out to driver.

If queue lock is provided by driver then block layer has no choice but
to call into driver even after cleanup(). (As after shutdown(), till
release() is called, you will need spin lock to check whether queue is
dead or not).
 
> 
> Currently, the code has different opportunistic checks which can catch
> most of those cases but unfortunatly I think it just makes the bugs
> more obscure.
> 
> That said, we probably should be switching to internal lock once
> clenaup is complete.

So even switching to internal lock is racy. Christoph suggeted to break down
this sharing of queue lock and driver lock and suggested always use
internal queue lock and modify drivers to use their own lock and manage it.
It makes sense though it might be lot of work to fix drivers.

Thanks
Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-19 17:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-19  4:26 [PATCHSET block/for-next] fix request_queue life-cycle management Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 01/10] block: make gendisk hold a reference to its queue Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 02/10] block: fix genhd refcounting in blkio_policy_parse_and_set() Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 13:26   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 16:29     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 16:59       ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 22:05         ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 22:07           ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 23:51             ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-20 13:41               ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-20 16:11                 ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-20 16:16                   ` Kay Sievers
2011-10-20 17:50                     ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-20 17:47                   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 03/10] block: move blk_throtl prototypes to block/blk.h Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 13:33   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 04/10] block: pass around REQ_* flags instead of broken down booleans during request alloc/free Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 13:44   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 16:31     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 05/10] block: drop unnecessary blk_get/put_queue() in scsi_cmd_ioctl() and blk_get_tg() Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 13:52   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 16:35     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 06/10] block: reorganize queue draining Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 07/10] block: reorganize throtl_get_tg() and blk_throtl_bio() Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 14:56   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 17:06     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 17:19       ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-10-19 17:30         ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 17:45           ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 17:49             ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 08/10] block: make get_request[_wait]() fail if queue is dead Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 15:22   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 09/10] block: drop @tsk from attempt_plug_merge() and explain sync rules Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:26 ` [PATCH 10/10] block: fix request_queue lifetime handling by making blk_queue_cleanup() proper shutdown Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 12:43   ` Jens Axboe
2011-10-19 17:13     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 18:04       ` Jens Axboe
2011-10-19 16:18   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 17:12     ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 17:29       ` Vivek Goyal
2011-10-19 17:33         ` Tejun Heo
2011-10-19  4:29 ` [PATCHSET block/for-next] fix request_queue life-cycle management Tejun Heo
2011-10-19 12:44 ` Jens Axboe

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=20111019171917.GA4026@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=ctalbott@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).