Re: [PATCH 1/2] md: fix WARN_ON if create symlink fail in bind_rdev_to_array()

[Song Liu]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 5:17 PM Li Nan <linan666@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> 在 2023/12/22 2:58, Song Liu 写道:
[...]
> > In general, I would like to avoid adding flags if possible.
> >
>
> This flag is mainly used to fix deadlock in next patch. Or should we
> export bd_find_holder_disk()? Link hodler if it return NULL.
> just like:
>
>    rdev_for_each_rcu
>      if (!bd_find_holder_disk)
>        bd_link_disk_holder

I was thinking we will not need the flag if we fail bind_rdev_to_array()
on error (below).

>
>
> >>   };
> >>
> >>   static inline int is_badblock(struct md_rdev *rdev, sector_t s, int sectors,
> >> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> >> index e05858653a41..d6612b922c76 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> >> @@ -2526,7 +2526,8 @@ static int bind_rdev_to_array(struct md_rdev *rdev, struct mddev *mddev)
> >>                  sysfs_get_dirent_safe(rdev->kobj.sd, "bad_blocks");
> >>
> >>          list_add_rcu(&rdev->same_set, &mddev->disks);
> >> -       bd_link_disk_holder(rdev->bdev, mddev->gendisk);
> >> +       if (!bd_link_disk_holder(rdev->bdev, mddev->gendisk))
> >> +               set_bit(SymlinkCreated, &rdev->flags);
> >
> > Shall we just fail bind_rdev_to_array() if bd_link_disk_holder()
> > returns non-zero?
> >
>
> I keep this action because of commit 00bcb4ac7ee7 ("md: reduce
> dependence on sysfs."). Fail bind_rdev_to_array is good to me.

I wonder whether the assumption in 00bcb4ac7ee7 is still true. If
bd_link_disk_holder() fails for valid reasons, we need to handle it
properly (set a flag, check the flag on unlink, etc.). If we only fail
bd_link_disk_holder() on extreme cases (ENOMEM, etc.), we can
just fail bind_rdev_to_array().

Thanks,
Song