All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org, nbd@other.debian.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] nbd: use the correct block_device in nbd_ioctl
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 14:23:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220324132322.2t3y4evcxunlpvzm@quack3.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220324122041.itc55zladc5sax5p@quack3.lan>

On Thu 24-03-22 13:20:41, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Thu 24-03-22 08:51:07, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The bdev parameter to ->ioctl contains the block device that the ioctl
> > is called on, which can be the partition.  But the code in nbd_ioctl
> > that uses it really wants the whole device for things like the bd_openers
> > check.  Switch to not pass the bdev along and always use nbd->disk->part0
> > instead.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> 
> Looks good. Feel free to add:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>

Hum, thinking about this some more...

> > -static void nbd_clear_sock_ioctl(struct nbd_device *nbd,
> > -				 struct block_device *bdev)
> > +static void nbd_clear_sock_ioctl(struct nbd_device *nbd)
> >  {
> >  	sock_shutdown(nbd);
> > -	__invalidate_device(bdev, true);
> > -	nbd_bdev_reset(bdev);
> > +	__invalidate_device(nbd->disk->part0, true);
> > +	nbd_bdev_reset(nbd);

Should't we call __invalidate_device() for the partition bdev here? Because
if the NBD device has partitions, filesystem will be mounted on this
partition and we want to invalidate it. Similarly the partition buffer
cache is different from the buffer cache of the whole device and we should
invalidate the partition one. In fact in cases like this I think we need
to invalidate all the partitions and filesystems that are there on this
disk so neither the old, nor the new code looks quite correct to me. Am I
missing something?

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-24 13:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-24  7:51 yet another approach to fix the loop lock order inversions v4 Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 01/13] nbd: use the correct block_device in nbd_ioctl Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 12:20   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24 13:23     ` Jan Kara [this message]
2022-03-24 17:11       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-25  9:39         ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 02/13] zram: cleanup reset_store Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 12:21   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 03/13] zram: cleanup zram_remove Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 13:15   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 04/13] block: add a disk_openers helper Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 13:24   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 05/13] block: turn bdev->bd_openers into an atomic_t Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 13:31   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24 17:12     ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 06/13] loop: de-duplicate the idle worker freeing code Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 07/13] loop: initialize the worker tracking fields once Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 08/13] loop: remove the racy bd_inode->i_mapping->nrpages asserts Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 09/13] loop: don't freeze the queue in lo_release Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 10/13] loop: only freeze the queue in __loop_clr_fd when needed Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 11/13] loop: implement ->free_disk Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 12/13] loop: remove lo_refcount and avoid lo_mutex in ->open / ->release Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 14:13   ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24 14:24     ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-03-24 17:23       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-25 10:54         ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-03-25 16:23           ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-28  8:30             ` Jan Kara
2022-03-29  6:39               ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-29  9:42                 ` Jan Kara
2022-03-29  9:49                   ` Tetsuo Handa
2022-03-29 13:14                   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-30  7:58                     ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24 17:15     ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 17:47       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-25  9:34         ` Jan Kara
2022-03-24  7:51 ` [PATCH 13/13] loop: don't destroy lo->workqueue in __loop_clr_fd Christoph Hellwig
2022-03-24 14:14   ` Jan Kara

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=20220324132322.2t3y4evcxunlpvzm@quack3.lan \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=nbd@other.debian.org \
    --cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.