Re: [PATCH] md: only unlock mddev from action_store

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 2022-06-02 07:45, Guoqing Jiang wrote:
> The 07reshape5intr test is broke because of below path.
> 
>     md_reap_sync_thread
>             -> mddev_unlock
>             -> md_unregister_thread(&mddev->sync_thread)
> 
> And md_check_recovery is triggered by,
> 
> mddev_unlock -> md_wakeup_thread(mddev->thread)
> 
> then mddev->reshape_position is set to MaxSector in raid5_finish_reshape
> since MD_RECOVERY_INTR is cleared in md_check_recovery, which means
> feature_map is not set with MD_FEATURE_RESHAPE_ACTIVE and superblock's
> reshape_position can't be updated accordingly.
> 
> Since the bug which commit 8b48ec23cc51a ("md: don't unregister sync_thread
> with reconfig_mutex held") fixed is related with action_store path, other
> callers which reap sync_thread didn't need to be changed, let's
> 
> 1. only unlock mddev in md_reap_sync_thread if caller is action_store,
>    so the parameter is renamed to reflect the change.
> 2. save some contexts (MD_RECOVERY_INTR and reshape_position) since they
>    could be changed by other processes, then restore them after get lock
>    again.
> 
> Fixes: 8b48ec23cc51a ("md: don't unregister sync_thread with reconfig_mutex held")
> Reported-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> I suppose the previous bug still can be fixed with the change, but it is
> better to verify it. Donald, could you help to test the new code?
> 
> Thanks,
> Guoqing
> 
>  drivers/md/md.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
>  drivers/md/md.h |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> index 5c8efef13881..3387260dd55b 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> @@ -6197,7 +6197,7 @@ static void __md_stop_writes(struct mddev *mddev)
>  		flush_workqueue(md_misc_wq);
>  	if (mddev->sync_thread) {
>  		set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR, &mddev->recovery);
> -		md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, true);
> +		md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, false);
>  	}
>  
>  	del_timer_sync(&mddev->safemode_timer);
> @@ -9303,7 +9303,7 @@ void md_check_recovery(struct mddev *mddev)
>  			 * ->spare_active and clear saved_raid_disk
>  			 */
>  			set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR, &mddev->recovery);
> -			md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, true);
> +			md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, false);
>  			clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_RECOVER, &mddev->recovery);
>  			clear_bit(MD_RECOVERY_NEEDED, &mddev->recovery);
>  			clear_bit(MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING, &mddev->sb_flags);
> @@ -9338,7 +9338,7 @@ void md_check_recovery(struct mddev *mddev)
>  			goto unlock;
>  		}
>  		if (mddev->sync_thread) {
> -			md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, true);
> +			md_reap_sync_thread(mddev, false);
>  			goto unlock;
>  		}
>  		/* Set RUNNING before clearing NEEDED to avoid
> @@ -9411,18 +9411,30 @@ void md_check_recovery(struct mddev *mddev)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(md_check_recovery);
>  
> -void md_reap_sync_thread(struct mddev *mddev, bool reconfig_mutex_held)
> +void md_reap_sync_thread(struct mddev *mddev, bool unlock_mddev)
>  {
>  	struct md_rdev *rdev;
>  	sector_t old_dev_sectors = mddev->dev_sectors;
> +	sector_t old_reshape_position;
>  	bool is_reshaped = false;
> +	bool is_interrupted = false;
>  
> -	if (reconfig_mutex_held)
> +	if (unlock_mddev) {
> +		old_reshape_position = mddev->reshape_position;
> +		if (test_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR, &mddev->recovery))
> +			is_interrupted = true;
>  		mddev_unlock(mddev);
> +	}
>  	/* resync has finished, collect result */
>  	md_unregister_thread(&mddev->sync_thread);
> -	if (reconfig_mutex_held)
> +	if (unlock_mddev) {
>  		mddev_lock_nointr(mddev);
> +		/* restore the previous flag and position */
> +		mddev->reshape_position = old_reshape_position;
> +		if (is_interrupted)
> +			set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR, &mddev->recovery);
> +	}

Maybe instead of the ugly boolean argument we could pull
md_unregister_thread() into all the callers and explicitly unlock in the
single call site that needs it?

Logan



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux