softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
assert(dbs->acb) is meant to check the return value of io_func per
documented in commit 6bee44ea34 ("dma: the passed io_func does not
return NULL"). However, there is a chance that after calling
aio_context_release(dbs->ctx); the dma_blk_cb function is called before
the assertion and dbs->acb is set to NULL again at line 121. Thus when
we run assert at line 181 it will fail.
softmmu/dma-helpers.c:181: dma_blk_cb: Assertion `dbs->acb' failed.
Reported-by: Francisco Londono <f.londono@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <t.zhang2@samsung.com>
---
softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
index 7820fec54c..cb81017928 100644
--- a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
+++ b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
@@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static void dma_blk_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
aio_context_acquire(dbs->ctx);
dbs->acb = dbs->io_func(dbs->offset, &dbs->iov,
dma_blk_cb, dbs, dbs->io_func_opaque);
- aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
assert(dbs->acb);
+ aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
}
static void dma_aio_cancel(BlockAIOCB *acb)
--
2.25.1
On 06.05.22 18:31, Tong Zhang wrote:
> assert(dbs->acb) is meant to check the return value of io_func per
> documented in commit 6bee44ea34 ("dma: the passed io_func does not
> return NULL"). However, there is a chance that after calling
> aio_context_release(dbs->ctx); the dma_blk_cb function is called before
> the assertion and dbs->acb is set to NULL again at line 121. Thus when
> we run assert at line 181 it will fail.
>
> softmmu/dma-helpers.c:181: dma_blk_cb: Assertion `dbs->acb' failed.
>
> Reported-by: Francisco Londono <f.londono@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <t.zhang2@samsung.com>
> ---
> softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> index 7820fec54c..cb81017928 100644
> --- a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> +++ b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> @@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static void dma_blk_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> aio_context_acquire(dbs->ctx);
> dbs->acb = dbs->io_func(dbs->offset, &dbs->iov,
> dma_blk_cb, dbs, dbs->io_func_opaque);
> - aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> assert(dbs->acb);
> + aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> }
>
> static void dma_aio_cancel(BlockAIOCB *acb)
Please don't resend patches if the previous submission came to the
conclusion that it's unclear how this should help.
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJSP0QW396RY_g8LS1mncDZcOv5GamURy+xv+s8zMcdq03OOMA@mail.gmail.com
I *still* don't understand the interaction between the lock and the
assertion and so far nobody was able to clarify.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:29 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06.05.22 18:31, Tong Zhang wrote:
> > assert(dbs->acb) is meant to check the return value of io_func per
> > documented in commit 6bee44ea34 ("dma: the passed io_func does not
> > return NULL"). However, there is a chance that after calling
> > aio_context_release(dbs->ctx); the dma_blk_cb function is called before
> > the assertion and dbs->acb is set to NULL again at line 121. Thus when
> > we run assert at line 181 it will fail.
> >
> > softmmu/dma-helpers.c:181: dma_blk_cb: Assertion `dbs->acb' failed.
> >
> > Reported-by: Francisco Londono <f.londono@samsung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <t.zhang2@samsung.com>
> > ---
> > softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > index 7820fec54c..cb81017928 100644
> > --- a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > +++ b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > @@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static void dma_blk_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> > aio_context_acquire(dbs->ctx);
> > dbs->acb = dbs->io_func(dbs->offset, &dbs->iov,
> > dma_blk_cb, dbs, dbs->io_func_opaque);
> > - aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> > assert(dbs->acb);
> > + aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> > }
> >
> > static void dma_aio_cancel(BlockAIOCB *acb)
>
> Please don't resend patches if the previous submission came to the
> conclusion that it's unclear how this should help.
>
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJSP0QW396RY_g8LS1mncDZcOv5GamURy+xv+s8zMcdq03OOMA@mail.gmail.com
>
>
> I *still* don't understand the interaction between the lock and the
> assertion and so far nobody was able to clarify.
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
hello
This message is sent way before the discussion
>
On 29.06.22 10:31, Tong Zhang wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:29 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com
> <mailto:david@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 06.05.22 18:31, Tong Zhang wrote:
> > assert(dbs->acb) is meant to check the return value of io_func per
> > documented in commit 6bee44ea34 ("dma: the passed io_func does not
> > return NULL"). However, there is a chance that after calling
> > aio_context_release(dbs->ctx); the dma_blk_cb function is called
> before
> > the assertion and dbs->acb is set to NULL again at line 121. Thus when
> > we run assert at line 181 it will fail.
> >
> > softmmu/dma-helpers.c:181: dma_blk_cb: Assertion `dbs->acb' failed.
> >
> > Reported-by: Francisco Londono <f.londono@samsung.com
> <mailto:f.londono@samsung.com>>
> > Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <t.zhang2@samsung.com
> <mailto:t.zhang2@samsung.com>>
> > ---
> > softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > index 7820fec54c..cb81017928 100644
> > --- a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > +++ b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> > @@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static void dma_blk_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> > aio_context_acquire(dbs->ctx);
> > dbs->acb = dbs->io_func(dbs->offset, &dbs->iov,
> > dma_blk_cb, dbs, dbs->io_func_opaque);
> > - aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> > assert(dbs->acb);
> > + aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> > }
> >
> > static void dma_aio_cancel(BlockAIOCB *acb)
>
> Please don't resend patches if the previous submission came to the
> conclusion that it's unclear how this should help.
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJSP0QW396RY_g8LS1mncDZcOv5GamURy+xv+s8zMcdq03OOMA@mail.gmail.com
> <https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAJSP0QW396RY_g8LS1mncDZcOv5GamURy+xv+s8zMcdq03OOMA@mail.gmail.com>
>
>
> I *still* don't understand the interaction between the lock and the
> assertion and so far nobody was able to clarify.
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
> hello
>
> This message is sent way before the discussion
Oh, I'm sorry. I was mislead by the reply from Laurent :)
BTW, do we now have an understanding why that patch helps and if it
applies to upstream?
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Le 06/05/2022 à 18:31, Tong Zhang a écrit :
> assert(dbs->acb) is meant to check the return value of io_func per
> documented in commit 6bee44ea34 ("dma: the passed io_func does not
> return NULL"). However, there is a chance that after calling
> aio_context_release(dbs->ctx); the dma_blk_cb function is called before
> the assertion and dbs->acb is set to NULL again at line 121. Thus when
> we run assert at line 181 it will fail.
>
> softmmu/dma-helpers.c:181: dma_blk_cb: Assertion `dbs->acb' failed.
>
> Reported-by: Francisco Londono <f.londono@samsung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tong Zhang <t.zhang2@samsung.com>
> ---
> softmmu/dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> index 7820fec54c..cb81017928 100644
> --- a/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> +++ b/softmmu/dma-helpers.c
> @@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static void dma_blk_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
> aio_context_acquire(dbs->ctx);
> dbs->acb = dbs->io_func(dbs->offset, &dbs->iov,
> dma_blk_cb, dbs, dbs->io_func_opaque);
> - aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> assert(dbs->acb);
> + aio_context_release(dbs->ctx);
> }
>
> static void dma_aio_cancel(BlockAIOCB *acb)
Fixes: 1919631e6b55 ("block: explicitly acquire aiocontext in bottom halves that need it")
Reviewed-by: Laurent Vivier <laurent@vivier.eu>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.