Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:48:50 +0200 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3] loop: No need to initialize ->queue_lock explicitly before calling blk_cleanup_queue() |
| |
On (02/22/11 09:20), Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 09:30:32AM +0200, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > On (02/21/11 22:53), Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > o Now we initialize ->queue_lock at queue allocation time so driver does > > > not have to worry about initializing it before calling blk_cleanup_queue(). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/block/loop.c | 3 --- > > > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c > > > index 49e6a54..44e18c0 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/block/loop.c > > > +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c > > > @@ -1641,9 +1641,6 @@ out: > > > > > > static void loop_free(struct loop_device *lo) > > > { > > > - if (!lo->lo_queue->queue_lock) > > > - lo->lo_queue->queue_lock = &lo->lo_queue->__queue_lock; > > > - > > > blk_cleanup_queue(lo->lo_queue); > > > put_disk(lo->lo_disk); > > > list_del(&lo->lo_list); > > > > Hi, > > > > (just for note) > > There is an incremental patch fixing this case in Andrew's mm tree: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/11/165 > > > > (block-fix-queue_lock-null-pointer-derefence-in-blk_throtl_exit-v4.patch > > added to -mm tree). > > Hi Sergey, > > Thinking more about it, initializing queue lock in blk_alloc_queue() seems > to be even more cleaner to me instead of initializing it to internal lock > during blk_cleanup_queue(). If others like the idea, then we can either > ask Andrew to drop the patch or I can generate one on top of it. >
Hi Vivek,
Sure, fixing the even probability of NULL queue_lock is better (correct/sane/etc.) then fixing NULL queue_lock in `different places'. I'm presonally OK with dropping my patch.
By the way, I guess we should Cc stable when we decide which one [fix] will land on the mainline (taking in account that we're on -rc6 already).
Side Note: Need to check if .37 is affected (I suspect it is).
Sergey [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |