Re: nbd: add locking to nbd_ioctl

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Jan 28 2009 - 20:14:51 EST


On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:31:33 +0100
Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> The code was written to rely on big kernel lock to protect it from
> races. It mostly works when interface is not abused.
>
> So this uses tx_lock to protect data structures from concurrent use
> between ioctl and worker threads.
>
> Next step will be moving from ioctl to unlocked_ioctl.

I hope I got the latest version of this...

The patch adds new trailing whitespace. Either a) you wanted to add
new trailing whitespace or b) you're not running checkpatch. Either
way: bad Pavel!

>
> ...
>
> + case NBD_SET_SOCK:
> + {
> + struct file *file;
> + if (lo->file)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + file = fget(arg);
> + if (file) {
> + struct inode *inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
> + if (S_ISSOCK(inode->i_mode)) {
> + lo->file = file;
> + lo->sock = SOCKET_I(inode);
> + if (max_part > 0)
> + bdev->bd_invalidated = 1;
> + return 0;
> + } else {
> + fput(file);
> + }
> }
> }
> - return error;
> + return -EINVAL;

This isn't terribly readable - the -EINVAL is in fact specifically a
response to receiving a !S_ISSOCK fd, but this is presented in a
rather obfuscated way.

> case NBD_SET_BLKSIZE:
> lo->blksize = arg;
> lo->bytesize &= ~(lo->blksize-1);
> @@ -634,47 +626,65 @@ static int nbd_ioctl(struct block_device
> set_blocksize(bdev, lo->blksize);
> set_capacity(lo->disk, lo->bytesize >> 9);
> return 0;
> +
> case NBD_SET_SIZE:
> lo->bytesize = arg & ~(lo->blksize-1);
> bdev->bd_inode->i_size = lo->bytesize;
> set_blocksize(bdev, lo->blksize);
> set_capacity(lo->disk, lo->bytesize >> 9);
> return 0;
> +
> case NBD_SET_TIMEOUT:
> lo->xmit_timeout = arg * HZ;
> return 0;
> +
> case NBD_SET_SIZE_BLOCKS:
> lo->bytesize = ((u64) arg) * lo->blksize;
> bdev->bd_inode->i_size = lo->bytesize;
> set_blocksize(bdev, lo->blksize);
> set_capacity(lo->disk, lo->bytesize >> 9);
> return 0;
> +
> case NBD_DO_IT:
> - if (lo->pid)
> - return -EBUSY;
> - if (!lo->file)
> - return -EINVAL;
> - thread = kthread_create(nbd_thread, lo, lo->disk->disk_name);
> - if (IS_ERR(thread))
> - return PTR_ERR(thread);
> - wake_up_process(thread);
> - error = nbd_do_it(lo);
> - kthread_stop(thread);
> - if (error)
> - return error;
> - sock_shutdown(lo, 1);
> - file = lo->file;
> - lo->file = NULL;
> - nbd_clear_que(lo);
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: queue cleared\n", lo->disk->disk_name);
> - if (file)
> - fput(file);
> - lo->bytesize = 0;
> - bdev->bd_inode->i_size = 0;
> - set_capacity(lo->disk, 0);
> - if (max_part > 0)
> - ioctl_by_bdev(bdev, BLKRRPART, 0);
> - return lo->harderror;
> + {
> + struct task_struct *thread;
> + struct file *file;
> + int error;
> +
> + if (lo->pid)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + if (!lo->file)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->tx_lock);
> +
> + thread = kthread_create(nbd_thread, lo, lo->disk->disk_name);
> + if (IS_ERR(thread)) {
> + mutex_lock(&lo->tx_lock);
> + return PTR_ERR(thread);
> + }
> + wake_up_process(thread);

We could/should use kthread_run() here.

> + error = nbd_do_it(lo);
> + kthread_stop(thread);
> +
> + mutex_lock(&lo->tx_lock);
> + if (error)
> + return error;
> + sock_shutdown(lo, 0);
> + file = lo->file;
> + lo->file = NULL;
> + nbd_clear_que(lo);
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: queue cleared\n", lo->disk->disk_name);

I don't get it - why are we warning about what appears to be an
expected operation?

> + if (file)
> + fput(file);
> + lo->bytesize = 0;
> + bdev->bd_inode->i_size = 0;
> + set_capacity(lo->disk, 0);
> + if (max_part > 0)
> + ioctl_by_bdev(bdev, BLKRRPART, 0);
> + return lo->harderror;
> + }
> +

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/