Hello. On 31.01.2020 10:24, Paolo Valente wrote:
In bfq_bfqq_move(), the bfq_queue, say Q, to be moved to a new group may happen to be deactivated in the scheduling data structures of the source group (and then activated in the destination group). If Q is referred only by the data structures in the source group when the deactivation happens, then Q is freed upon the deactivation. This commit addresses this issue by getting an extra reference before the possible deactivation, and releasing this extra reference after Q has been moved. Tested-by: Chris Evich <cevich@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@xxxxxxxxxx> --- block/bfq-cgroup.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/block/bfq-cgroup.c b/block/bfq-cgroup.c index e1419edde2ec..8ab7f18ff8cb 100644 --- a/block/bfq-cgroup.c +++ b/block/bfq-cgroup.c @@ -651,6 +651,12 @@ void bfq_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, bfq_bfqq_expire(bfqd, bfqd->in_service_queue, false, BFQQE_PREEMPTED); + /* + * get extra reference to prevent bfqq from being freed in + * next possible deactivate + */ + bfqq->ref++;
Shouldn't this be hidden under some macro (bfq_get_queue_ref(), for instance) and also converted from int into refcount_t?
+ if (bfq_bfqq_busy(bfqq)) bfq_deactivate_bfqq(bfqd, bfqq, false, false); else if (entity->on_st) @@ -670,6 +676,8 @@ void bfq_bfqq_move(struct bfq_data *bfqd, struct bfq_queue *bfqq, if (!bfqd->in_service_queue && !bfqd->rq_in_driver) bfq_schedule_dispatch(bfqd); + /* release extra ref taken above */ + bfq_put_queue(bfqq); } /**
-- Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
