From: no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com
To: Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@virtuozzo.com>,
Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: devel@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH hci-8.1 v2] block/blk-cbt: account a write request also when dm starts it
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2026 09:42:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <010701a17cbd7971-db1fd55c-ab15-4a9b-be6e-d2945d881a58-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261027-ptikhomirov-vstor-149268-cbt-account-at-rq-start-v2-1-c64ee6178730@virtuozzo.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] block: cbt_set_present() uses signed 1 << block_bits, broken for 2^31 block size
- [Low] block: blk_cbt_rq_start() page-preallocation assumption fails for throttled bios
--
commit 8e6a8c8b97e55c2b9c4f298b97031be4fd0bb8f9
Author: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com>
block/blk-cbt: account a write request also when dm starts it
This patch makes CBT account a write a second time when request-based dm
starts the request, so that a request dispatched after a suspend-time
backup point is still recorded. The dispatch hook only sets bits in bitmap
pages that already exist. If a page is missing, it queues an allocation on
kblockd and dm-rq returns BLK_STS_RESOURCE so that blk-mq retries the
request later.
Link: https://virtuozzo.atlassian.net/browse/VSTOR-149268
> diff --git a/block/blk-cbt.c b/block/blk-cbt.c
> --- a/block/blk-cbt.c
> +++ b/block/blk-cbt.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -236,6 +259,12 @@ static void blk_cbt_add(struct cbt_info *cbt, blkcnt_t start, blkcnt_t len)
> __blk_cbt_set(cbt, start, len, 1, 1, NULL, NULL);
> return;
> }
> + /*
> + * Preallocate the pages for blk_cbt_rq_start(): it runs under the
> + * dispatch rcu_read_lock(), and a missing page there means delaying
> + * the request and allocating the page from the kblockd workqueue.
> + */
> + cbt_alloc_pages(cbt, start, len);
> ex = get_cpu_ptr(cbt->cache);
[Severity: Low]
The comment here, and the commit message ("A page can still be missing
only for a write submitted before BLKCBTSTART"), say that preallocation
at submission covers every write except those submitted before
BLKCBTSTART.
Is that accurate for throttled bios? In submit_bio_noacct() a throttled
write returns before the CBT hook:
if (blk_throtl_bio(bio))
return;
blk_cbt_bio_queue(q, bio);
submit_bio_noacct_nocheck(bio);
Later blk_throtl_dispatch_work_fn() resubmits it with:
while ((bio = bio_list_pop(&bio_list_on_stack)))
submit_bio_noacct_nocheck(bio);
This path never calls blk_cbt_bio_queue(), so blk_cbt_add() never runs
cbt_alloc_pages() for that bio. When the request reaches dm_mq_queue_rq(),
blk_cbt_rq_start() can find the page missing. It then queues kblockd work
and dm_mq_queue_rq() returns BLK_STS_RESOURCE.
The retry does terminate, so this looks like a one-time delayed dispatch.
Could the commit message and this comment be updated to mention that case?
[ ... ]
> +static bool cbt_set_present(struct cbt_info *cbt, blkcnt_t start, blkcnt_t len)
> +{
> + blkcnt_t block, end;
> + unsigned long flags;
> + bool missing = false;
> +
> + end = DIV_ROUND_UP(start + len, 1 << cbt->block_bits);
[Severity: Low]
This problem wasn't introduced by this patch in blk_cbt_add(), but the
same expression is repeated here. 1 << cbt->block_bits is a signed int
shift.
If block_bits is 31, the shift overflows. cbt_ioc_init() only checks
is_power_of_2(ci.ci_blksize), so a privileged caller can pass
ci_blksize = 0x80000000, and do_cbt_alloc() then sets block_bits to 31.
In practice 1 << 31 becomes INT_MIN and is sign-extended into the 64-bit
DIV_ROUND_UP().
Can end then come out wrong, so that either the "end > cbt->block_max"
check sets CBT_ERROR spuriously, or the "while (block < end)" loop skips
every page and no writes are recorded?
Would 1ULL << cbt->block_bits, or a shift on a blkcnt_t, avoid this in
both cbt_set_present() and blk_cbt_add()?
> + block = start >> cbt->block_bits;
> + if (unlikely(end > cbt->block_max)) {
> + set_bit(CBT_ERROR, &cbt->flags);
> + return false;
> + }
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.vzint.dev/#/patchset/20261027-ptikhomirov-vstor-149268-cbt-account-at-rq-start-v2-1-c64ee6178730@virtuozzo.com?part=1
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-27 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-27 9:36 Pavel Tikhomirov
2026-10-27 9:42 ` no-reply [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=010701a17cbd7971-db1fd55c-ab15-4a9b-be6e-d2945d881a58-000000@eu-central-1.amazonses.com \
--to=no-reply@sashiko.virtuozzo.com \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=khorenko@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=ptikhomirov@virtuozzo.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox