From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: blk_throtl_exit taking q->queue_lock is problematic
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:00:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110217200010.GF9075@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110216183114.26a3613b@notabene.brown>
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 06:31:14PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I recently discovered that blk_throtl_exit takes ->queue_lock when a blockdev
> is finally released.
>
> This is a problem for because by that time the queue_lock doesn't exist any
> more. It is in a separate data structure controlled by the RAID personality
> and by the time that the block device is being destroyed the raid personality
> has shutdown and the data structure containing the lock has been freed.
Hi Neil,
I am having a look at queue allocation in md and had few queries.
I was looking at md_alloc(), where we do
mddev->queue = blk_alloc_queue(GFP_KERNEL);
blk_queue_make_request(mddev->queue, md_make_request);
call to blk_queue_make_request() will make sure queue_lock is initiliazed
to internal __queue_lock.
Then I looked at raid0_run(), which is again setting the queue lock.
mddev->queue->queue_lock = &mddev->queue->__queue_lock;
I think this is redundant now as during md_alloc() we already did it.
Similar seems to be the case for linear.c and multipath.c
Following seem to be the cases where we overide the default lock.
raid1.c, raid5.c, raid10.c
I was going through the raid1.c, and I see that q->queue_lock has
been initialized to &conf->deivce_lock. Can we do the reverse. Introduce
spinlock pointer in conf and point it at queue->queue_lock? Anyway you
mentioned that personality's data structure are freed before request
queue is cleaned up, so there should not be any lifetime issues.
Also I was wondering how does it help sharing the lock between request
queue and some other data structures in driver.
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-17 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-16 7:31 NeilBrown
2011-02-16 15:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 0:35 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-17 1:10 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 5:55 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-17 15:01 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 16:59 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-18 2:40 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-18 3:19 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-02-18 3:33 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-18 14:04 ` Mike Snitzer
2011-02-18 15:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-21 7:24 ` NeilBrown
2011-02-21 14:42 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-18 15:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-17 20:00 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-02-18 1:57 ` NeilBrown
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=20110217200010.GF9075@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/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
Powered by JetHome