On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 03:56:58PM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:07 PM Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote: > > > static void bio_chain_endio(struct bio *bio) > > > { > > > bio_endio(__bio_chain_endio(bio)); > > > } > > > > bio_chain_endio() never gets called really, which can be thought as `flag`, > > That's probably where this stops being relevant for the problem > reported by Stephen Zhang. > > > and it should have been defined as `WARN_ON_ONCE(1);` for not confusing > > people. > > But shouldn't bio_chain_endio() still be fixed to do the right thing > if called directly, or alternatively, just BUG()? Warning and still > doing the wrong thing seems a bit bizarre.
IMO calling ->bi_end_io() directly shouldn't be encouraged. The only in-tree direct call user could be bcache, so is this reported issue triggered on bcache? If bcache can't call bio_endio(), I think it is fine to fix bio_chain_endio(). > > I also see direct bi_end_io calls in erofs_fileio_ki_complete(), > erofs_fscache_bio_endio(), and erofs_fscache_submit_bio(), so those > are at least confusing. All looks FS bio(non-chained), so bio_chain_endio() shouldn't be involved in erofs code base. Thanks, Ming
