Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Fix a race in the runtime power management code
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 14:24:23 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200825182423.GB375466@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1598346681.10649.8.camel@mtkswgap22>

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 05:11:21PM +0800, Stanley Chu wrote:
> Sorry, resend to fix typo.
> 
> Hi Bart,
> 
> On Sun, 2020-08-23 at 20:06 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > With the current implementation the following race can happen:
> > * blk_pre_runtime_suspend() calls blk_freeze_queue_start() and
> >   blk_mq_unfreeze_queue().
> > * blk_queue_enter() calls blk_queue_pm_only() and that function returns
> >   true.
> > * blk_queue_enter() calls blk_pm_request_resume() and that function does
> >   not call pm_request_resume() because the queue runtime status is
> >   RPM_ACTIVE.
> > * blk_pre_runtime_suspend() changes the queue status into RPM_SUSPENDING.
> > 
> > Fix this race by changing the queue runtime status into RPM_SUSPENDING
> > before switching q_usage_counter to atomic mode.
> > 
> > Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> > Cc: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
> > Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> > Cc: stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> > Fixes: 986d413b7c15 ("blk-mq: Enable support for runtime power management")
> > Signed-off-by: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> > ---
> >  block/blk-pm.c | 15 +++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/block/blk-pm.c b/block/blk-pm.c
> > index b85234d758f7..17bd020268d4 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-pm.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-pm.c
> > @@ -67,6 +67,10 @@ int blk_pre_runtime_suspend(struct request_queue *q)
> >  
> >  	WARN_ON_ONCE(q->rpm_status != RPM_ACTIVE);
> >  
> > +	spin_lock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
> > +	q->rpm_status = RPM_SUSPENDING;
> > +	spin_unlock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
> > +
> 
> Has below alternative way been considered that RPM_SUSPENDING is set
> after blk_freeze_queue_start()?
> 
> 	blk_freeze_queue_start(q);
> 
> +	spin_lock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
> +	q->rpm_status = RPM_SUSPENDING;
> +	spin_unlock_irq(&q->queue_lock);
> 
> 
> Otherwise requests can enter queue while rpm_status is RPM_SUSPENDING
> during a small window, i.e., before blk_set_pm_only() is invoked. This
> would make the definition of rpm_status ambiguous.
> 
> In this way, the racing could be also solved:
> 
> - Before blk_freeze_queue_start(), any requests shall be allowed to
> enter queue
> - blk_freeze_queue_start() freezes the queue and blocks all upcoming
> requests (make them wait_event(q->mq_freeze_wq))
> - rpm_status is set as RPM_SUSPENDING
> - blk_mq_unfreeze_queue() wakes up q->mq_freeze_wq and then
> blk_pm_request_resume() can be executed

A very similar question arises concerning the transition from 
RPM_SUSPENDING to RPM_SUSPENDED.  I am not convinced that the existing 
synchronization is sufficient.  However, this may not matter because...

A related question concerns the BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT flag.  If it is set 
then the request is allowed whilel rpm_status is RPM_SUSPENDING.  But in 
fact, the only requests which should be allowed at that time are those 
created by the lower-layer driver as part of its runtime-suspend 
handling; all other requests should be deferred.  The BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT 
flag doesn't seem like the right way to achieve this.  Should we be 
using a different flag?

Alan Stern

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-25 18:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-24  3:06 [PATCH] block: Fix a race in the runtime power management code Bart Van Assche
2020-08-24 14:47 ` Alan Stern
2020-08-25  9:01 ` Stanley Chu
2020-08-25  9:11 ` Stanley Chu
2020-08-25 18:24   ` Alan Stern [this message]
2020-08-25 22:22     ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-26  1:51       ` Alan Stern
2020-08-27  3:35         ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-27 20:33           ` Alan Stern
2020-08-28  3:27             ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-28 15:37               ` Alan Stern
2020-08-29  0:51                 ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-29  1:12                   ` Alan Stern
2020-08-29  2:57                     ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-26  2:58   ` Bart Van Assche
2020-08-26  4:00     ` Stanley Chu

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=20200825182423.GB375466@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=cang@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
    /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