From: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
To: Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
Cc: jens.axboe@oracle.com, nai.xia@gmail.com, rdreier@cisco.com,
bzolnier@gmail.com, flo@rfc822.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at ide-cd.c:1726 in 2.6.24-03863-g0ba6c33 && -g8561b089
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 19:29:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080201182909.GA7837@gollum.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080201.123927.71085228.k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 12:39:27PM -0500, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
<snip>
> > > end_that_request_last() is not called when __blk_end_reuqest()
> > > returns 1. Then, the issuer isn't waken up.
> > > So I think the BUG() or error messages should be there.
> >
> > you mean, end_that_request_last() isn't called when __end_that_request_first()
> > returns an error and this is the case only for fs and pc requests.
> > Otherwise it _is_ called, thus simulating somewhat the previous behavior.
> > However, we never BUG()'ged on residual byte counts before and
> > this driver has been in the kernel tree for ages, so what puzzles
> > me now is how is BUG()'ing here better than before and shouldn't we
> > simply issue a warning instead of killing the interrupt handler...
>
> The Jens' patch passes the residual byte counts to __blk_end_request(),
> so __end_that_reqeust_first() should never return 1 and we should never
> BUG() on the residual byte counts, unless inconsistency happens such as
> the size of remaining bios is bigger than the residual byte counts.
yep.
> So if __blk_end_request() returns 1 even with the Jens' patch,
> it means that the block layer or the driver really have a bug.
> And then, the request and the bios could leak or the issuer
> would wait forever because end_that_request_last() isn't called.
>
> The previous behavior might ignore such inconsistency and leak only
> the bios because it was calling end_that_request_last() anyway.
> I would like to BUG() in such cases personally, but I don't object
> strongly if you prefer not to BUG().
BUG() is definitely what we should do here to catch this case of sizeof(bios) >
rq->data_len. Putting a brown paper bag over the issue will never get it fixed
if it really leaks bios. Thanks for clarifying that.
By the way, shouldn't we be doing a little branch prediction here:
diff --git a/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c b/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
index 74c6087..bee05a3 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-cd.c
@@ -1722,7 +1722,7 @@ static ide_startstop_t cdrom_newpc_intr(ide_drive_t *drive)
*/
if ((stat & DRQ_STAT) == 0) {
spin_lock_irqsave(&ide_lock, flags);
- if (__blk_end_request(rq, 0, 0))
+ if (unlikely(__blk_end_request(rq, 0, rq->data_len)))
BUG();
HWGROUP(drive)->rq = NULL;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ide_lock, flags);
--
Regards/Gruß,
Boris.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-01 18:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-29 14:01 Nai Xia
2008-01-29 15:33 ` Florian Lohoff
2008-01-29 20:13 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-01-29 22:22 ` Roland Dreier
2008-01-29 23:23 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-01-29 23:58 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-01-30 5:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2008-01-30 5:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2008-01-31 1:26 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-01-31 2:34 ` Roland Dreier
2008-01-31 7:49 ` Nai Xia
2008-01-31 13:05 ` Jens Axboe
2008-01-31 14:53 ` Florian Lohoff
2008-01-31 15:04 ` Jens Axboe
2008-02-01 21:59 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-01-31 17:04 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-01-31 18:16 ` Jens Axboe
2008-01-31 20:35 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-01-31 21:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2008-01-31 22:35 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-02-01 7:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2008-02-01 17:39 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
2008-02-01 18:29 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2008-02-01 19:37 ` Kiyoshi Ueda
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=20080201182909.GA7837@gollum.tnic \
--to=petkovbb@googlemail.com \
--cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=flo@rfc822.org \
--cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nai.xia@gmail.com \
--cc=petkovbb@gmail.com \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®