Re: [PATCH] md/raid5: fix atomicity violation in raid5_cache_count

[Yu Kuai]

Hi,

在 2023/12/22 10:34, 20 39 写道:
> Hi Kuai,
>
> Thank you for your patience. This email is essentially the same as my
> previous one, only now adjusted to plain text format. I apologize for
> any inconvenience caused earlier.
>
> Thanks for your email and the insightful points you've raised. Let me
> clarify a few aspects regarding the raid5_cache_count() and
> raid5_set_cache_size() functions.
>
> 1. Callback Function in setup_conf(): You mentioned that
> raid5_cache_count() is called from setup_conf() where reconfig_mutex
> is held. While this is true, it's important to note that
> raid5_cache_count() is actually initialized as a callback function in
> setup_conf(), as described in /include/linux/shrinker.h. This means it
> could be invoked later in a context where the reconfig_mutex isn't
> necessarily held. The documentation in shrinker.h indicates potential
> invocation scenarios beyond the initial setup context.

Yes, you're right. I misread the code. Then this patch looks good to me,
just one nit below.

> > > > @@ -7390,11 +7390,12 @@ static unsigned long raid5_cache_count(struct shrinker *shrink,
> > > >                                       struct shrink_control *sc)
> > > >    {
> > > >        struct r5conf *conf = shrink->private_data;
> > > > -
> > > > -     if (conf->max_nr_stripes < conf->min_nr_stripes)
> > > > +     int max_stripes = conf->max_nr_stripes;
> > > > +     int min_stripes = conf->min_nr_stripes;

Since read and write can concurrent, I'll suggest to use READ_ONCE() and
WRITE_ONCE() for max/min_nr_stripes.

Thanks,
Kuai
> > > > +     if (max_stripes < min_stripes)
> > > >                /* unlikely, but not impossible */
> > > >                return 0;
> > > > -     return conf->max_nr_stripes - conf->min_nr_stripes;
> > > > +     return max_stripes - min_stripes;
> > > >    }
> > > >
> > > >    static struct r5conf *setup_conf(struct mddev *mddev)
> .