On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 3:27 AM Tetsuo Handa <
penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> Can you review this patch? syzbot has hit this bug for nearly 4000 times
but
> is still unable to find a reproducer. Therefore, the only way to test
would be
> to apply this patch upstream and test whether the problem is solved.
Looks ok to me, except:
> > smp_wmb();
> > clear_bit(WB_shutting_down, &wb->state);
> > + smp_mb(); /* advised by wake_up_bit() */
> > + wake_up_bit(&wb->state, WB_shutting_down);
This whole sequence really should just be a pattern with a helper function.
And honestly, the pattern probably *should* be
clear_bit_unlock(bit, &mem);
smp_mb__after_atomic()
wake_up_bit(&mem, bit);
which looks like it is a bit cleaner wrt memory ordering rules.
Linus
