diff mbox series

[-next,v2,1/2] block, bfq: protect 'bfqd->queued' by 'bfqd->lock'

Message ID 20220513023507.2625717-2-yukuai3@huawei.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series block, bfq: make bfq_has_work() more accurate | expand

Commit Message

Yu Kuai May 13, 2022, 2:35 a.m. UTC 
If bfq_schedule_dispatch() is called from bfq_idle_slice_timer_body(),
then 'bfqd->queued' is read without holding 'bfqd->lock'. This is
wrong since it can be wrote concurrently.

Fix the problem by holding 'bfqd->lock' in such case.

Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
---
 block/bfq-iosched.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Chaitanya Kulkarni May 13, 2022, 6:13 a.m. UTC | #1 
On 5/12/2022 7:35 PM, Yu Kuai wrote:
> If bfq_schedule_dispatch() is called from bfq_idle_slice_timer_body(),
> then 'bfqd->queued' is read without holding 'bfqd->lock'. This is
> wrong since it can be wrote concurrently.
> 
> Fix the problem by holding 'bfqd->lock' in such case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>

-ck
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
index 272d48d8f326..61750696e87f 100644
--- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
+++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
@@ -456,6 +456,8 @@  static struct bfq_io_cq *bfq_bic_lookup(struct request_queue *q)
  */
 void bfq_schedule_dispatch(struct bfq_data *bfqd)
 {
+	lockdep_assert_held(&bfqd->lock);
+
 	if (bfqd->queued != 0) {
 		bfq_log(bfqd, "schedule dispatch");
 		blk_mq_run_hw_queues(bfqd->queue, true);
@@ -6898,8 +6900,8 @@  bfq_idle_slice_timer_body(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq)
 	bfq_bfqq_expire(bfqd, bfqq, true, reason);
 
 schedule_dispatch:
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags);
 	bfq_schedule_dispatch(bfqd);
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bfqd->lock, flags);
 }
 
 /*