Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] block: prevent race condition on bi_status in __bio_chain_endio
Andreas Gruenbacher <[email protected]> Mon, 1 Dec 2025 14:07:07 +0100
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-bcache,org.kernel.vger.linux-block,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAHc6FU7k7vH5bJaM6Hk6rej77t4xijBESDeThdDe1yCOqogjtA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 12:25 PM Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 11:22:32AM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > > - if (bio->bi_status && !parent->bi_status) > > > - parent->bi_status = bio->bi_status; > > > + if (bio->bi_status) > > > + cmpxchg(&parent->bi_status, 0, bio->bi_status); > > > > Hmm. I don't think cmpxchg() actually is of any value here: for all > > the chained bios, bi_status is initialized to 0, and it is only set > > again (to a non-0 value) when a failure occurs. When there are > > multiple failures, we only need to make sure that one of those > > failures is eventually reported, but for that, a simple assignment is > > enough here. > > A simple assignment doesn't guarantee atomicy. Well, we've already discussed that bi_status is a single byte and so tearing won't be an issue. Otherwise, WRITE_ONCE() would still be enough here. > It also overrides earlier with later status codes, which might not be desirable. In an A -> B bio chain, we have two competing bi_status writers: (1) when the A fails, B->bi_status will be updated using cmpxchg(), (2) when B fails, bi_status will be assigned a non-0 value. In that scenario, B failures will always win over A failures. In addition, when we have an A -> B -> C bio chain, we still won't get "first failure wins" semantics because a failure of A will only be propagated to C once B completes as well. To "fix" that, we'd have to "chain" all bios to the same parent instead. But I don't think any of that is really needed. Andreas