> Il giorno 07 feb 2018, alle ore 11:15, Mike Galbraith <efa...@gmx.de> ha
> scritto:
>
> On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 10:45 +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>
>>> Il giorno 07 feb 2018, alle ore 10:23, Mike Galbraith <efa...@gmx.de> ha
>>> scritto:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 10:08 +0100, Paolo Valente wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The first piece of information I need is whether this failure happens
>>>> even without "BFQ hierarchical scheduling support".
>>>
>>> I presume you mean BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED, which I do not have enabled.
>>>
>>
>> Great (so to speak), this saves us one step.
>>
>> So, here's my next request for help: please apply the attached patch
>> (compressed to preserve it from my email client) and retry. It adds
>> several anomaly checks. I hope I have not added any false-positive
>> check.
>
> kernel BUG at block/bfq-iosched.c:4742!
>
> 4742 BUG_ON(!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV));
Oh my, this is as crazy as, fortunately, easy to fix. The problem is
that this is easy to fix in bfq, but increases the doubts I have
expressed in my cover letter: is it ok that, in blk-mq, the functions
of an elevator may get invoked, without control, on requests that do
not belong to that elevator?
Anyway, two requests, Mike, if you haven't had enough already:
1. Could you paste a stack trace for this OOPS, just to understand how we
get there?
2. Could you please turn that BUG_ON into:
if (!(rq->rq_flags & RQF_ELVPRIV))
return;
and see what happens?
Thanks a lot,
Paolo
