Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 11 Dec 2018 23:06:43 -0500
From:   Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>, kernel-team@fb.com,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blkcg: handle dying request_queue when associating a blkg
Message-ID: <20181212040643.GA73727@dennisz-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
References: <20181211230308.66276-1-dennis@kernel.org>
 <1544570173.185366.397.camel@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1544570173.185366.397.camel@acm.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bart,

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 03:16:13PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 18:03 -0500, Dennis Zhou wrote:
> > diff --git a/block/blk-cgroup.c b/block/blk-cgroup.c
> > index 6bd0619a7d6e..c30661ddc873 100644
> > --- a/block/blk-cgroup.c
> > +++ b/block/blk-cgroup.c
> > @@ -202,6 +202,12 @@ static struct blkcg_gq *blkg_create(struct blkcg *blkcg,
> >  	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held());
> >  	lockdep_assert_held(&q->queue_lock);
> >  
> > +	/* request_queue is dying, do not create/recreate a blkg */
> > +	if (blk_queue_dying(q)) {
> > +		ret = -ENODEV;
> > +		goto err_free_blkg;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	/* blkg holds a reference to blkcg */
> >  	if (!css_tryget_online(&blkcg->css)) {
> >  		ret = -ENODEV;
> 
> What prevents that the queue state changes after blk_queue_dying() has returned
> and before blkg_create() returns? Are you sure you don't need to protect this
> code with a blk_queue_enter() / blk_queue_exit() pair?
> 

Hmmm. So I think the idea is that we rely on normal shutdown as I don't
think there is anything wrong with creating a blkg on a dying
request_queue. When we are doing association, the request_queue should
be pinned by the open call. What we are racing against is when the
request_queue is shutting down, it goes around and destroys the blkgs.
For clarity, QUEUE_FLAG_DYING is set in blk_cleanup_queue() before
calling blk_exit_queue() which eventually calls blkcg_exit_queue().

The use of blk_queue_dying() is to determine whether blkg shutdown has
already started as if we create one after it has started, we may
incorrectly orphan a blkg and leak it. Both blkg creation and
destruction require holding the queue_lock, so if the QUEUE_FLAG_DYING
flag is set after we've checked it, it means blkg destruction hasn't
started because it has to wait on the queue_lock. If QUEUE_FLAG_DYING is
set, then we have no guarantee of knowing what phase blkg destruction is
in leading to a potential leak.

Thanks,
Dennis