IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Kernel thread routine bch_writeback_thread() has the following code block,
447 down_write(&dc->writeback_lock);
448~450 if (check conditions) {
451 up_write(&dc->writeback_lock);
452 set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
453
454 if (kthread_should_stop())
455 return 0;
456
457 schedule();
458 continue;
459 }
If condition check is true, its task state is set to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
and call schedule() to wait for others to wake up it.
There are 2 issues in current code,
1, Task state is set to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE after the condition checks, if
another process changes the condition and call wake_up_process(dc->
writeback_thread), then at line 452 task state is set back to
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, the writeback kernel thread will lose a chance to be
waken up.
2, At line 454 if kthread_should_stop() is true, writeback kernel thread
will return to kernel/kthread.c:kthread() with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and
call do_exit(). It is not good to enter do_exit() with task state
TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, in following code path might_sleep() is called and a
warning message is reported by __might_sleep(): "WARNING: do not call
blocking ops when !TASK_RUNNING; state=1 set at [xxxx]".
For the first issue, task state should be set before condition checks.
Ineed because dc->writeback_lock is required when modifying all the
conditions, calling set_current_state() inside code block where dc->
writeback_lock is hold is safe. But this is quite implicit, so I still move
set_current_state() before all the condition checks.
For the second issue, frankley speaking it does not hurt when kernel thread
exits with TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE state, but this warning message scares users,
makes them feel there might be something risky with bcache and hurt their
data. Setting task state to TASK_RUNNING before returning fixes this
problem.
In alloc.c:allocator_wait(), there is also a similar issue, and is also
fixed in this patch.
Changelog:
v3: merge two similar fixes into one patch
v2: fix the race issue in v1 patch.
v1: initial buggy fix.
Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Michael Lyle <mlyle@lyle.org>
Cc: Michael Lyle <mlyle@lyle.org>
Cc: Junhui Tang <tang.junhui@zte.com.cn>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
99361bbf26