Re: io-uring: KASAN failure, presumably

[Nadav Amit]

> On Sep 12, 2021, at 11:15 AM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 9/11/21 8:34 PM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> Hello Jens (& Pavel),
>> 
>> I hope you are having a nice weekend. I ran into a KASAN failure in io-uring
>> which I think is not "my fault".
>> 
>> The failure does not happen very infrequently, so my analysis is based on
>> reading the code. IIUC the failure, then I do not understand the code well
>> enough, as to say I do not understand how it was supposed to work. I would
>> appreciate your feedback.
>> 
>> The failure happens on my own custom kernel (do not try to correlate the line
>> numbers). The gist of the splat is:
> 
> I think this is specific to your use case, but I also think that we
> should narrow the scope for this type of REQ_F_REISSUE trigger. It
> really should only happen on bdev backed regular files, where we cannot
> easily pass back congestion. For that case, the completion for this is
> called while we're in ->write_iter() for example, and hence there is no
> race here.
> 
> I'll ponder this a bit…

I see what you are saying. The assumption is that write_iter() is setting
REQ_F_REISSUE, which is not the case in my use-case. Perhaps EAGAIN is
anyhow not the right return value (in my case). I am not sure any other
“invalid" use-case exists, but some documentation/assertion(?) can help.

I changed the return error-codes and check that the issue is not
triggered again.

Thanks, as usual, for the quick response.