Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To:     Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@chromium.org>,
        Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@linaro.org>
Cc:     Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Yu Kuai <yukuai1@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221108181030.1611703-1-khazhy@google.com>
References: <20221103013937.603626-1-khazhy@google.com> <20221108181030.1611703-1-khazhy@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bfq: fix waker_bfqq inconsistency crash
Message-Id: <166802322145.66062.9011104820940557467.b4-ty@kernel.dk>
Date:   Wed, 09 Nov 2022 12:47:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:10:29 -0800, Khazhismel Kumykov wrote:
> This fixes crashes in bfq_add_bfqq_busy due to waker_bfqq being NULL,
> but woken_list_node still being hashed. This would happen when
> bfq_init_rq() expects a brand new allocated queue to be returned from
> bfq_get_bfqq_handle_split() and unconditionally updates waker_bfqq
> without resetting woken_list_node. Since we can always return oom_bfqq
> when attempting to allocate, we cannot assume waker_bfqq starts as NULL.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/2] bfq: fix waker_bfqq inconsistency crash
      commit: a1795c2ccb1e4c49220d2a0d381540024d71647c
[2/2] bfq: ignore oom_bfqq in bfq_check_waker
      commit: 99771d73ff4539f2337b84917f4792abf0d8931b

Best regards,
-- 
Jens Axboe