Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] blk-mq: Lockout tagset iterator when exiting
 elevator
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>, hare@suse.de,
        ming.lei@redhat.com, axboe@kernel.dk, hch@lst.de
Cc:     linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        pragalla@codeaurora.org, kashyap.desai@broadcom.com,
        yuyufen@huawei.com
References: <1614957294-188540-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <1614957294-188540-4-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <48a3cf78-3f6d-c13c-bca2-1f8277817b45@acm.org>
 <9c9360bf-7ca9-5c8f-c61d-441044f9c78f@huawei.com>
 <784a3686-cb54-561d-740c-30e0b3f46df8@acm.org>
 <f60dc68f-9206-2bfb-950e-cb312f1c4c8b@huawei.com>
 <de3dec73-c8fc-d14f-5bbb-7023ccc6b57e@acm.org>
 <b4e39d48-3524-ac34-c20e-0dadcf15e3d6@huawei.com>
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
Message-ID: <b74dc9ef-0db1-eb27-e2a7-c26e3dbd527a@acm.org>
Date:   Wed, 10 Mar 2021 08:00:14 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b4e39d48-3524-ac34-c20e-0dadcf15e3d6@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 3/10/21 12:52 AM, John Garry wrote:
> On 09/03/2021 19:21, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> Regarding this patch series, I have shared the feedback I wanted to
>> share so I would appreciate it if someone else could also take a look.
> 
> So I can incorporate any changes and suggestions so far and send a 
> non-RFC version - that may get more attention if none extra comes.
> 
> As mentioned on the cover letter, if patch 2+3/3 are accepted, then 
> patch 1/3 could be simplified. But I plan to leave as is.
> 
> BTW, any issue with putting your suggested-by on patch 2/3?

Hi John,

I have added my Reviewed-by to patch 2/3.

Regarding the other two patches in this series: I do not agree with 
patch 3/3. As I have explained, I am concerned that that patch breaks 
existing block drivers.

Are patches 1/3 and 3/3 necessary? Or in other words, is patch 2/3 
sufficient to fix the use-after-free?

Thanks,

Bart.