mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Abinash Singh <abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com>,
	James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com
Cc: martin.petersen@oracle.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] scsi: sd: Fix build warning in sd_revalidate_disk()
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 17:01:17 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5cfefec0-b64b-4f96-a943-4de3205d3c50@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250807183000.31465-1-abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com>

On 8/8/25 3:30 AM, Abinash Singh wrote:
> A build warning was triggered due to excessive stack usage in
> sd_revalidate_disk():
> 
> drivers/scsi/sd.c: In function ‘sd_revalidate_disk.isra’:
> drivers/scsi/sd.c:3824:1: warning: the frame size of 1160 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
> 
> This is caused by a large local struct queue_limits (~400B) allocated
> on the stack. Replacing it with a heap allocation using kmalloc()
> significantly reduces frame usage. Kernel stack is limited (~8 KB),
> and allocating large structs on the stack is discouraged.
> As the function already performs heap allocations (e.g. for buffer),
> this change fits well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abinash Singh <abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com>

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sd.c b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> index 4a68b2ab2804..a03844400e51 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sd.c
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/bio-integrity.h>
> +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/fs.h>
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
> @@ -3696,11 +3696,16 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
>  	struct scsi_disk *sdkp = scsi_disk(disk);
>  	struct scsi_device *sdp = sdkp->device;
>  	sector_t old_capacity = sdkp->capacity;
> -	struct queue_limits lim;
>  	unsigned char *buffer;
>  	unsigned int dev_max;
>  	int err;
>  
> +	struct queue_limits *lim __free(kfree) = kmalloc(sizeof(*lim), GFP_KERNEL);

Please keep the declarations together. Not sure how that will work with that
unreadable __free(kfree) annotation though (the "unreadable" part of this
comment is only my opinion... I really dislike stuff that hides code...).

> +	if (!lim) {
> +		sd_printk(KERN_WARNING, sdkp, "sd_revalidate_disk: Memory allocation failure.\n");

Long line. Please split after sdkp. Also, the same message is used for the
buffer allocation. So maybe differentiate with it ? E.g. something like "Disk
limit allocation failure" ?

> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
>  	SCSI_LOG_HLQUEUE(3, sd_printk(KERN_INFO, sdkp,
>  				      "sd_revalidate_disk\n"));
>  
> @@ -3720,14 +3726,14 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
>  
>  	sd_spinup_disk(sdkp);
>  
> -	lim = queue_limits_start_update(sdkp->disk->queue);
> +	*lim = queue_limits_start_update(sdkp->disk->queue);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Without media there is no reason to ask; moreover, some devices
>  	 * react badly if we do.
>  	 */
>  	if (sdkp->media_present) {
> -		sd_read_capacity(sdkp, &lim, buffer);
> +		sd_read_capacity(sdkp, lim, buffer);
>  		/*
>  		 * Some USB/UAS devices return generic values for mode pages
>  		 * until the media has been accessed. Trigger a READ operation
> @@ -3741,17 +3747,17 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
>  		 * cause this to be updated correctly and any device which
>  		 * doesn't support it should be treated as rotational.
>  		 */
> -		lim.features |= (BLK_FEAT_ROTATIONAL | BLK_FEAT_ADD_RANDOM);
> +		lim->features |= (BLK_FEAT_ROTATIONAL | BLK_FEAT_ADD_RANDOM);
>  
>  		if (scsi_device_supports_vpd(sdp)) {
>  			sd_read_block_provisioning(sdkp);
> -			sd_read_block_limits(sdkp, &lim);
> +			sd_read_block_limits(sdkp, lim);
>  			sd_read_block_limits_ext(sdkp);
> -			sd_read_block_characteristics(sdkp, &lim);
> -			sd_zbc_read_zones(sdkp, &lim, buffer);
> +			sd_read_block_characteristics(sdkp, lim);
> +			sd_zbc_read_zones(sdkp, lim, buffer);
>  		}
>  
> -		sd_config_discard(sdkp, &lim, sd_discard_mode(sdkp));
> +		sd_config_discard(sdkp, lim, sd_discard_mode(sdkp));
>  
>  		sd_print_capacity(sdkp, old_capacity);
>  
> @@ -3761,45 +3767,45 @@ static int sd_revalidate_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
>  		sd_read_app_tag_own(sdkp, buffer);
>  		sd_read_write_same(sdkp, buffer);
>  		sd_read_security(sdkp, buffer);
> -		sd_config_protection(sdkp, &lim);
> +		sd_config_protection(sdkp, lim);
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * We now have all cache related info, determine how we deal
>  	 * with flush requests.
>  	 */
> -	sd_set_flush_flag(sdkp, &lim);
> +	sd_set_flush_flag(sdkp, lim);
>  
>  	/* Initial block count limit based on CDB TRANSFER LENGTH field size. */
>  	dev_max = sdp->use_16_for_rw ? SD_MAX_XFER_BLOCKS : SD_DEF_XFER_BLOCKS;
>  
>  	/* Some devices report a maximum block count for READ/WRITE requests. */
>  	dev_max = min_not_zero(dev_max, sdkp->max_xfer_blocks);
> -	lim.max_dev_sectors = logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max);
> +	lim->max_dev_sectors = logical_to_sectors(sdp, dev_max);
>  
>  	if (sd_validate_min_xfer_size(sdkp))
> -		lim.io_min = logical_to_bytes(sdp, sdkp->min_xfer_blocks);
> +		lim->io_min = logical_to_bytes(sdp, sdkp->min_xfer_blocks);
>  	else
> -		lim.io_min = 0;
> +		lim->io_min = 0;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Limit default to SCSI host optimal sector limit if set. There may be
>  	 * an impact on performance for when the size of a request exceeds this
>  	 * host limit.
>  	 */
> -	lim.io_opt = sdp->host->opt_sectors << SECTOR_SHIFT;
> +	lim->io_opt = sdp->host->opt_sectors << SECTOR_SHIFT;
>  	if (sd_validate_opt_xfer_size(sdkp, dev_max)) {
> -		lim.io_opt = min_not_zero(lim.io_opt,
> +		lim->io_opt = min_not_zero(lim->io_opt,
>  				logical_to_bytes(sdp, sdkp->opt_xfer_blocks));
>  	}
>  
>  	sdkp->first_scan = 0;
>  
>  	set_capacity_and_notify(disk, logical_to_sectors(sdp, sdkp->capacity));
> -	sd_config_write_same(sdkp, &lim);
> +	sd_config_write_same(sdkp, lim);
>  	kfree(buffer);
>  
> -	err = queue_limits_commit_update_frozen(sdkp->disk->queue, &lim);
> +	err = queue_limits_commit_update_frozen(sdkp->disk->queue, lim);
>  	if (err)
>  		return err;
>  


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-08  8:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-07 18:30 Abinash Singh
2025-08-08  8:01 ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2025-08-08 11:30   ` [PATCH v2] " Abinash Singh
2025-08-08 11:30     ` [PATCH v3] " Abinash Singh
2025-08-08 13:35       ` Damien Le Moal
2025-08-08 13:38     ` [PATCH v2] " Damien Le Moal
2025-08-08 18:28       ` [PATCH v4] " Abinash Singh
2025-08-08 19:25         ` Bart Van Assche

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=5cfefec0-b64b-4f96-a943-4de3205d3c50@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=abinashsinghlalotra@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.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®