From: Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>, unsik Kim <donari75@gmail.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <mschwid2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [RFC] Switching block device elevators
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 16:52:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C6950B3.8020702@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
After commit 1abec4fdbb142e3ccb6ce99832fae42129134a96, "block: make
blk_init_free_list and elevator_init idempotent", we're seeing kernel
panics in our s390 tape block device driver. The panic is triggered
because our driver tries to replace the default elevator with a noop
elevator by calling elevator_exit() directly followed by elevator_init().
Since the commit, elevator_init() returns 0 if request_queue->elevator
is non-null, even though it does not install a new elevator. As a
result, the next access to the elevator finds a pointer to the old one
which was already freed and a panic is triggered. Our current fix
consists of setting the elevator pointer to NULL after elevator_exit().
There is at least one other driver where the problem currently exists
(drivers/block/mg_disk.c, author on cc) and another s390 driver where
the problem was only accidentally fixed before 2.6.35. I'm wondering if
there's a better solution (apart from not forcing an elevator) and would
like to hear everyone's opinion on this matter. How about declaring
elevator_switch() non-static, for example?
Regards,
Peter Oberparleiter
next reply other threads:[~2010-08-16 14:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-16 14:52 Peter Oberparleiter [this message]
2010-08-16 15:44 ` Mike Snitzer
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=4C6950B3.8020702@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=donari75@gmail.com \
--cc=heicars2@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mschwid2@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.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
Powered by JetHome