On Tue 28-02-17 23:26:53, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:25:28PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:24:25AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Tue 21-02-17 10:19:28, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > On 02/21/2017 10:09 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > this is a second revision of the patch set to fix several different
> > > > > races and
> > > > > issues I've found when testing device shutdown and reuse. The first
> > > > > three
> > > > > patches are fixes to problems in my previous series fixing BDI
> > > > > lifetime issues.
> > > > > Patch 4 fixes issues with reuse of BDI name with scsi devices. With
> > > > > it I cannot
> > > > > reproduce the BDI name reuse issues using Omar's stress test using
> > > > > scsi_debug
> > > > > so it can be used as a replacement of Dan's patches. Patches 5-11 fix
> > > > > oops that
> > > > > is triggered by __blkdev_put() calling inode_detach_wb() too early
> > > > > (the problem
> > > > > reported by Thiago). Patches 12 and 13 fix oops due to a bug in
> > > > > gendisk code
> > > > > where get_gendisk() can return already freed gendisk structure (again
> > > > > triggered
> > > > > by Omar's stress test).
> > > > >
> > > > > People, please have a look at patches. They are mostly simple however
> > > > > the
> > > > > interactions are rather complex so I may have missed something. Also
> > > > > I'm
> > > > > happy for any additional testing these patches can get - I've
> > > > > stressed them
> > > > > with Omar's script, tested memcg writeback, tested static (not udev
> > > > > managed)
> > > > > device inodes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jens, I think at least patches 1-3 should go in together with my
> > > > > fixes you
> > > > > already have in your tree (or shortly after them). It is up to you
> > > > > whether
> > > > > you decide to delay my first fixes or pick these up quickly. Patch 4
> > > > > is
> > > > > (IMHO a cleaner) replacement of Dan's patches so consider whether you
> > > > > want
> > > > > to use it instead of those patches.
> > > >
> > > > I have applied 1-3 to my for-linus branch, which will go in after
> > > > the initial pull request has been pulled by Linus. Consider fixing up
> > > > #4 so it applies, I like it.
> > >
> > > OK, attached is patch 4 rebased on top of Linus' tree from today which
> > > already has linux-block changes pulled in. I've left put_disk_devt() in
> > > blk_cleanup_queue() to maintain the logic in the original patch (now
> > > commit
> > > 0dba1314d4f8) that request_queue and gendisk each hold one devt reference.
> > > The bdi_unregister() call that is moved to del_gendisk() by this patch is
> > > now protected by the gendisk reference instead of the request_queue one
> > > so it still maintains the property that devt reference protects bdi
> > > registration-unregistration lifetime (as much as that is not needed
> > > anymore
> > > after this patch).
> > >
> > > I have also updated the comment in the code and the changelog - they were
> > > somewhat stale after changes to the whole series Tejun suggested.
> > >
> > > Honza
> >
> > Hey, Jan, I just tested this out when I was seeing similar crashes with
> > sr instead of sd, and this fixed it.
> >
> > Tested-by: Omar Sandoval <[email protected]>
>
> Just realized it wasn't clear, I'm talking about patch 4 specifically.
Thanks for confirmation!
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
