From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3B1C2BA15 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 02:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE1F20672 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 02:01:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="iT7i2dGu" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726300AbgDECBR (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Apr 2020 22:01:17 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-f196.google.com ([209.85.222.196]:34962 "EHLO mail-qk1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726057AbgDECBR (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Apr 2020 22:01:17 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f196.google.com with SMTP id k134so1955585qke.2 for ; Sat, 04 Apr 2020 19:01:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i9tTFeTJCNm9ueBmVbdLbEXDemgjgTcU5urpmJjuhRE=; b=iT7i2dGu3zRFq5MPbvYkHtmTmjsa4+lCHk2Xol+gEEt63TRZy3lXno5nVHr7JMQk/P 7iL+nEVBvv1AOYSJpalJH02peIcQtmCKQR2s+nVGQdtrIeUGX69UpYQeGOpYT8cq1sPe W+u9jYLvTkw5Gg2DA89mKpafENNbWpq7ctug610pXQBmOWAGYgLGGTgtIjCZd+KXAmdp 7xlxn3VPVkwuGwbhI6IHSkHmQrJ1q1xK291yGvwcYoKY4XFPs/Jb9lSNEdMdyk7LwbSG 3BVHB2/TVM1jZDfSgw781i6Sh0deSQmbZ3wd5TmwbkwwWe1TqXHQJzcHAFREUSTI5TaF bMdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i9tTFeTJCNm9ueBmVbdLbEXDemgjgTcU5urpmJjuhRE=; b=qWn1Tquotu8Nq7RCqrfvcPbBCLNrbwO3dQLPiFPHSqmzsk5Xgwin2UVyR+N+D79BKJ gwYTJJig0RB/w1FC7hR+/Hx46b7mFTwrBz3oxAx/g4eJVIClgFj1yfHRgO7fNYWq+GyY aAAqbqlRjZ2w6nhJTyvVpXkeI/k1MD6X2PRXur7TAyQdMjztgMhJg5KD6VXOEfQVSCY1 UF85JvwK/F3LgldOvLGMV9klYmVtGpxiqq3lGcFwquIyxZxjhuRFFR6useTnW9lmEinC 2UuFd9bA66f5TTTz88qTjGnApbkNEsk70LMRRbc5y4T6TzEmWyBA4DD3g0pH85kJ6+gl PLhg== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYFik6gSHhj1AiGS14NjW+kHONsXOr7k9O8YWUDbv/BrccqEIzF TuFdGFwYAzgfVRAz1FR1JfQdoWiRS9AJ4U9koNk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypK0Ea5u/GvHgwdxFFqYpQNYK8ee52qXTmlO7MRROZtpzvhk0Q6Zb5Pz0CSpo7JuOPDvys15dsaGN7U0M0jCNMY= X-Received: by 2002:a37:bf06:: with SMTP id p6mr16177259qkf.477.1586052076281; Sat, 04 Apr 2020 19:01:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3f9abe8e-9017-410c-f0eb-a80e1c232e61@acm.org> In-Reply-To: <3f9abe8e-9017-410c-f0eb-a80e1c232e61@acm.org> From: Weiping Zhang Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 10:01:05 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix potential kernel panic when increase hardware queue To: Bart Van Assche Cc: Weiping Zhang , Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org Bart Van Assche =E4=BA=8E2020=E5=B9=B44=E6=9C=885=E6= =97=A5=E5=91=A8=E6=97=A5 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=881:22=E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > > On 2020-04-04 06:35, Weiping Zhang wrote: > > This patchset fix a potential kernel panic when increase more hardware > > queue at runtime. > > > > Patch1 fix a seperate issue, since patch2 depends on it, so I send a > > new patchset. > > > > Change since V1: > > * Add second patch to fix kernel panic when update hardware queue > > > > Weiping Zhang (2): > > block: save previous hardware queue count before udpate > > block: alloc map and request for new hardware queue > > On top of which kernel version have these patches been prepared and > tested? v5.5, v5.6, Jens' for-next branch or perhaps yet another kernel > version? I'm asking this since recently a fix for > blk_mq_realloc_hw_ctxs() has been accepted in Jens' tree. > Hi Bart, It's tested on commit "4308a434e" of block-5.7 branch, this branch has include the commit "blk-mq: Fix a recently introduced regression in blk_mq_realloc_hw_ctxs()". Thanks Weiping