On 2024/6/7 12:55, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 10:37:58AM +0800, Chengming Zhou wrote: >> Yeah, right, it seems LVM may create this special request that only has >> PREFLUSH | POSTFLUSH without any DATA, goes into the flush state machine. >> Then, cause the request double list_add_tail() without list_del_init(). >> I don't know the reason behind it, but well, it's allowable in the current >> flush code. > > PREFLUSH | POSTFLUSH is a weird invalid format. We'll need to fix this > in dm, and probably also catch it in the block layer submission path. > Right, how about add WARN here to catch it? Or just set it to PREFLUSH? Not familiar with dm code, need help if we need to fix it in dm. :) diff --git a/block/blk-flush.c b/block/blk-flush.c index c17cf8ed8113..3ce9ed78c375 100644 --- a/block/blk-flush.c +++ b/block/blk-flush.c @@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ static void blk_flush_complete_seq(struct request *rq, /* queue for flush */ if (list_empty(pending)) fq->flush_pending_since = jiffies; - list_move_tail(&rq->queuelist, pending); + list_add_tail(&rq->queuelist, pending); break; case REQ_FSEQ_DATA: @@ -263,6 +263,7 @@ static enum rq_end_io_ret flush_end_io(struct request *flush_rq, unsigned int seq = blk_flush_cur_seq(rq); BUG_ON(seq != REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH && seq != REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH); + list_del_init(&rq->queuelist); blk_flush_complete_seq(rq, fq, seq, error); } @@ -402,6 +403,12 @@ bool blk_insert_flush(struct request *rq) unsigned int policy = blk_flush_policy(fflags, rq); struct blk_flush_queue *fq = blk_get_flush_queue(q, rq->mq_ctx); + /* + * PREFLUSH | POSTFLUSH is a weird invalid format, + * need to fix in the upper layer, catch it here. + */ + WARN_ON_ONCE(policy == (REQ_FSEQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_FSEQ_POSTFLUSH)); + /* FLUSH/FUA request must never be merged */ WARN_ON_ONCE(rq->bio != rq->biotail);