On Mon, 29 Jan 2024, Tejun Heo wrote: > The only generic interface to execute asynchronously in the BH context is > tasklet; however, it's marked deprecated and has some design flaws. To > replace tasklets, BH workqueue support was recently added. A BH workqueue > behaves similarly to regular workqueues except that the queued work items > are executed in the BH context. > > This patch converts dm-verity from tasklet to BH workqueue. > > This is a minimal conversion which doesn't rename the related names > including the "try_verify_in_tasklet" option. If this patch is applied, a > follow-up patch would be necessary. I couldn't decide whether the option > name would need to be updated too. > > Only compile tested. I don't know how to verity. Download the cryptsetup package with "git clone https://gitlab.com/cryptsetup/cryptsetup"; and run the testsuite: ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && make check > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Alasdair Kergon <agk@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > --- > drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c | 8 ++++---- > drivers/md/dm-verity.h | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c b/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c > index 14e58ae70521..911261de2d08 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c > +++ b/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c > @@ -645,9 +645,9 @@ static void verity_work(struct work_struct *w) > verity_finish_io(io, errno_to_blk_status(verity_verify_io(io))); > } > > -static void verity_tasklet(unsigned long data) > +static void verity_bh_work(struct work_struct *w) > { > - struct dm_verity_io *io = (struct dm_verity_io *)data; > + struct dm_verity_io *io = container_of(w, struct dm_verity_io, bh_work); > int err; > > io->in_tasklet = true; > @@ -675,8 +675,8 @@ static void verity_end_io(struct bio *bio) > } > > if (static_branch_unlikely(&use_tasklet_enabled) && io->v->use_tasklet) { > - tasklet_init(&io->tasklet, verity_tasklet, (unsigned long)io); > - tasklet_schedule(&io->tasklet); > + INIT_WORK(&io->bh_work, verity_bh_work); > + queue_work(system_bh_wq, &io->bh_work); > } else { > INIT_WORK(&io->work, verity_work); > queue_work(io->v->verify_wq, &io->work); > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-verity.h b/drivers/md/dm-verity.h > index f9d522c870e6..7c16f834f31a 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/dm-verity.h > +++ b/drivers/md/dm-verity.h > @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ struct dm_verity_io { > struct bvec_iter iter; > > struct work_struct work; > - struct tasklet_struct tasklet; > + struct work_struct bh_work; > > /* > * Three variably-size fields follow this struct: Do we really need two separate work_structs here? They are never submitted concurrently, so I think that one would be enough. Or, am I missing something? Mikulas
