Hi Neil,
El Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 10:58:59AM +1100 NeilBrown ha dit:
> On Thu, Oct 05 2017, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
>
> > The raid10 driver can't be built with clang since it uses a variable
> > length array in a structure (VLAIS):
> >
> > drivers/md/raid10.c:4583:17: error: fields must have a constant size:
> > 'variable length array in structure' extension will never be supported
> >
> > Allocate the r10bio struct with kmalloc instead of using the VLAIS
> > construct.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <m...@chromium.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/md/raid10.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid10.c b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > index 374df5796649..9616163eaf8c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > +++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
> > @@ -4578,15 +4578,16 @@ static int handle_reshape_read_error(struct mddev
> > *mddev,
> > /* Use sync reads to get the blocks from somewhere else */
> > int sectors = r10_bio->sectors;
> > struct r10conf *conf = mddev->private;
> > - struct {
> > - struct r10bio r10_bio;
> > - struct r10dev devs[conf->copies];
> > - } on_stack;
> > - struct r10bio *r10b = &on_stack.r10_bio;
> > + struct r10bio *r10b;
> > int slot = 0;
> > int idx = 0;
> > struct page **pages;
> >
> > + r10b = kmalloc(sizeof(*r10b) +
> > + sizeof(struct r10dev) * conf->copies, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> GFP_KERNEL isn't a good idea here.
> This could wait for writeback, and if writeback tries to write to the
> region of the array which is being reshaped, it might deadlock.
>
> GFP_NOIO is safer.
Good point, thanks!
> given that conf->copies is almost always 2 it might be nicer to
> have
>
> struct {
> struct r10bio r10_bio;
> struct r10dev devs[2];
> } on_stack;
>
> struct r10bio *r10b;
>
> if (conf->copies <= ARRAY_SIZE(on_stack.devs))
> r10b = &on_stack.r10_bio;
> else
> r10b = kmalloc(sizeof(*r10b) +
> sizeof(struct r10dev) * conf->copies, GFP_NOIO);
It would add also add an extra condition to determine if r10b needs to
be freed or not.
Given that array reshaping is a rare operation and an error during
this operation is an exceptional condition I think the simpler code
with always dynamic allocation is preferable. That said I'm fine with
reworking the patch according to your suggestion if you or Shaohua
prefer it.
Matthias
> > + if (!r10b)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > /* reshape IOs share pages from .devs[0].bio */
> > pages = get_resync_pages(r10_bio->devs[0].bio)->pages;
> >
> > @@ -4635,11 +4636,13 @@ static int handle_reshape_read_error(struct mddev
> > *mddev,
> > /* couldn't read this block, must give up */
> > set_bit(MD_RECOVERY_INTR,
> > &mddev->recovery);
> > + kfree(r10b);
> > return -EIO;
> > }
> > sectors -= s;
> > idx++;
> > }
> > + kfree(r10b);
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
