Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-21 Thread Liu Bo
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:23:56AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 03/21/2017 10:08 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:44:18AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > > > > > > > At 03/21/2017 04:23 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-21 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 03/21/2017 01:45 PM, Liu Bo wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:23:56AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/21/2017 10:08 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:44:18AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/21/2017 04:23 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wro

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-20 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 03/21/2017 10:08 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:44:18AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/21/2017 04:23 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/18/2017 10:03 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wro

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-20 Thread Liu Bo
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:44:18AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 03/21/2017 04:23 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > > > > > > > At 03/18/2017 10:03 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-20 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 03/21/2017 04:23 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/18/2017 10:03 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/17/2017 12:44 PM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wro

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-20 Thread Liu Bo
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 02:21:48PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 03/18/2017 10:03 AM, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > > > > > > > At 03/17/2017 12:44 PM, Liu Bo wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > >

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-19 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 03/18/2017 10:03 AM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 03/17/2017 12:44 PM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Before this patch, btrfs raid56 will keep raid56 rbio even all its IO is done. This may save som

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-17 Thread Liu Bo
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > At 03/17/2017 12:44 PM, Liu Bo wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > Before this patch, btrfs raid56 will keep raid56 rbio even all its IO is > > > done. > > > This may save some time allocating

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-16 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 03/17/2017 12:44 PM, Liu Bo wrote: On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: Before this patch, btrfs raid56 will keep raid56 rbio even all its IO is done. This may save some time allocating rbio, but it can cause deadly use-after-free bug, for the following case: Original

Re: [PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-03-16 Thread Liu Bo
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 04:20:22PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Before this patch, btrfs raid56 will keep raid56 rbio even all its IO is > done. > This may save some time allocating rbio, but it can cause deadly > use-after-free bug, for the following case: > > Original fs: 4 devices RAID5 > >

[PATCH 4/5] btrfs: raid56: Don't keep rbio for later steal

2017-02-03 Thread Qu Wenruo
Before this patch, btrfs raid56 will keep raid56 rbio even all its IO is done. This may save some time allocating rbio, but it can cause deadly use-after-free bug, for the following case: Original fs: 4 devices RAID5 Process A | Process B --