Re: [PATCH] loop: defer the queue limits clear to a workqueue

[Bart Van Assche]

On 9/24/26 6:29 PM, Tao Cui wrote:
> 在 2026/9/25 02:01, Bart Van Assche 写道:
> > On 9/24/26 3:20 AM, Tao Cui wrote:
> > >        queue_limits_commit_update(lo->lo_queue, &lim);
> > > +    mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock);
> >
> > Since the mutex_lock(&lo->clear_limits_lock) call occurs after
> > queue_limits_start_update(), please move the
> > mutex_unlock(&lo->clear_limits_lock) call above the
> > queue_limits_commit_update() call. This has no impact on
> > correctness nor on the lock nesting order but makes the code
> > easier to follow.
>
> On moving mutex_unlock() above queue_limits_commit_update(): with
> the generation counters removed, the mutex is what keeps consuming
> clear_limits_mode and committing the resulting queue limits atomic
> with respect to a rebind. blk_mq_freeze_queue() is
> reference-counted, so the workfn and loop_change_fd() can both hold
> a freeze concurrently. If the workfn drops the mutex after consuming
> a non-zero mode but before queue_limits_commit_update(),
> loop_change_fd() could install a new backing file in that window,
> and the pending clear would then be committed to the new file. Since
> loop_change_fd() does not recompute the queue limits afterward, the
> incorrectly cleared discard limits would persist until the next
> reconfiguration.
>
> For that reason, I'd prefer to keep the mutex held until after
> queue_limits_commit_update(). I can add a comment explaining this if
> that would help.

This seems fragile to me. Can this race be solved by calling
cancel_work_sync(&lo->clear_limits_work) before the backing file is
changed?

Thanks,

Bart.