lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH BUGFIX 1/1] block, bfq: add requeue-request hook
From
Date


> Il giorno 07 feb 2018, alle ore 11:15, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> ha scritto:
>
> On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 10:45 +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 07 feb 2018, alle ore 10:23, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> ha scritto:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 10:08 +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The first piece of information I need is whether this failure happens
>>>> even without "BFQ hierarchical scheduling support".
>>>
>>> I presume you mean BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED, which I do not have enabled.
>>>
>>
>> Great (so to speak), this saves us one step.
>>
>> So, here's my next request for help: please apply the attached patch
>> (compressed to preserve it from my email client) and retry. It adds
>> several anomaly checks. I hope I have not added any false-positive
>> check.
>
> kernel BUG at block/bfq-iosched.c:4742!
>
> 4742 BUG_ON(!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV));

Oh my, this is as crazy as, fortunately, easy to fix. The problem is
that this is easy to fix in bfq, but increases the doubts I have
expressed in my cover letter: is it ok that, in blk-mq, the functions
of an elevator may get invoked, without control, on requests that do
not belong to that elevator?

Anyway, two requests, Mike, if you haven't had enough already:

1. Could you paste a stack trace for this OOPS, just to understand how we
get there?

2. Could you please turn that BUG_ON into:
if (!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV))
return;
and see what happens?

Thanks a lot,
Paolo
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-07 11:29    [W:0.059 / U:2.228 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site