lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [RFC] block: Don't let blk_put_request leak BIOs
Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> If a block ULD had allocated a request and mapped some memory into it,
>> using one of blk_rq_map_xxx routines, but then for some reason failed to
>> execute the request through one of the blk_execute_request routines.
>> Then the associated BIO would leak, unless ULD resorts to low-level loops
>> intimate of block internals.
>>
>> [RFC]
>> This code will also catch situations where LLD failed to complete
>> the request before aborting it. Such situations are a BUG. Should we
>> use WARN_ON_ONCE() in that case. The situation above is possible and
>> can happen normally in memory pressure situations so maybe we should
>> devise a bit-flag that ULD denotes that the request was aborted and
>> only WARN_ON if flag was not set.
>>
>> I'm sending this before any-tests so people can comment on possible
>> pitfalls.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
>> ---
>
> I've booted a Linux PC with lots of sata disks, connected an iscsi
> target, ran OSD tests. It looks like it's working which means
> request->bio is set to NULL after it is used in the regular path.
>
> This needs to sit in Linux next and be tested for a long while.
>
> Jens I'll be waiting for your comment and will send a proper
> patch for the block bits. We will have to time this with James
> to see when the OSD bits can be submitted after that, then TOMO's
> patch for un-exporting blk_req_append_bio can be merged. Or maybe
> it can all go in one patch through scsi?
>
> Thanks
> Boaz

Spock to soon this patch is shit, I'll look into it

Sorry for the noise

Boaz


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-02-12 14:59    [W:0.053 / U:0.424 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site