From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
syzbot <syzbot+4a7438e774b21ddd8eca@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bdi: Fix another oops in wb_workfn()
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 01:20:16 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7f4ae045-dfe4-6677-7418-f6f60b6c26f1@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180613144606.nvbcyg2rdjpxhf7s@quack2.suse.cz>
On 2018/06/13 23:46, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 13-06-18 19:43:47, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> Can't we utilize RCU grace period (like shown below) ?
>
> Honestly, the variant 1 looks too ugly to me. However variant 2 looks
> mostly OK. We can also avoid the schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HZ / 10)
> from your patch by careful handling of the bit waitqueues. Also I'd avoid
> the addition argument to wb_writeback() and split the function instead. The
> patch resulting from your and mine ideas is attached. Thoughts?
>
> Honza
>
+static bool cgwb_start_shutdown(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
+ __releases(cgwb_lock)
+{
+ if (!wb_start_shutdown(wb)) {
+ DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
+ wait_queue_head_t *wqh = bit_waitqueue(&wb->state,
+ WB_shutting_down);
+ bool sleep;
+
+ prepare_to_wait(wqh, &wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+ sleep = test_bit(WB_shutting_down, &wb->state);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&cgwb_lock);
+ if (sleep)
+ schedule();
+ return false;
+ }
+ spin_unlock_irq(&cgwb_lock);
+ return true;
+}
Since multiple addresses share bit_wait_table[256], isn't it possible that
cgwb_start_shutdown() prematurely returns false due to wake_up_bit() by
hash-conflicting addresses (i.e. not limited to clear_and_wake_up_bit() from
wb_shutdown())? I think that we cannot be sure without confirming that
test_bit(WB_shutting_down, &wb->state) == false after returning from schedule().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-13 16:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-26 9:15 general protection fault in wb_workfn (2) syzbot
2018-05-27 0:47 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-05-27 2:21 ` [PATCH] bdi: Fix another oops in wb_workfn() Tetsuo Handa
2018-05-27 2:36 ` Tejun Heo
2018-05-28 13:35 ` general protection fault in wb_workfn (2) Jan Kara
2018-05-30 16:00 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-05-31 11:42 ` Jan Kara
2018-05-31 13:19 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-05-31 13:42 ` Jan Kara
2018-05-31 16:56 ` Jens Axboe
2018-06-05 13:45 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-07 18:46 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-08 2:31 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-08 14:45 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-08 15:16 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-08 16:53 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-08 17:14 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2018-06-09 5:30 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-09 14:00 ` [PATCH] bdi: Fix another oops in wb_workfn() Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-11 9:12 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-11 16:01 ` Tejun Heo
2018-06-11 16:29 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-11 17:20 ` Tejun Heo
2018-06-12 15:57 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-13 10:43 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-13 11:51 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-13 14:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-13 14:46 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-13 14:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-13 16:20 ` Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2018-06-13 16:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2018-06-13 16:45 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-13 21:04 ` Tetsuo Handa
2018-06-14 10:11 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-13 14:33 ` Tejun Heo
2018-06-15 12:06 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-18 12:27 ` Jan Kara
2018-06-01 2:30 ` general protection fault in wb_workfn (2) Dave Chinner
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=7f4ae045-dfe4-6677-7418-f6f60b6c26f1@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+4a7438e774b21ddd8eca@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).