[RFC blktests fix PATCH] tcp: use GFP_ATOMIC in tcp_disconnect

[Nilay Shroff]

On 11/25/25 12:58 PM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 11/24/25 22:27, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> I don't think GFP_ATOMIC is right here, you want GFP_NOIO.
>>
>> And just use the scope API so that you don't have to pass a gfp_t
>> several layers down.
>>
>>
> are you saying something like this ?
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c b/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> index 29ad4735fac6..56d0a3777a4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/tcp.c
> @@ -1438,17 +1438,28 @@ static void nvme_tcp_free_queue(struct nvme_ctrl *nctrl, int qid)
>   	struct nvme_tcp_ctrl *ctrl = to_tcp_ctrl(nctrl);
>   	struct nvme_tcp_queue *queue = &ctrl->queues[qid];
>   	unsigned int noreclaim_flag;
> +	unsigned int noio_flag;
>   
>   	if (!test_and_clear_bit(NVME_TCP_Q_ALLOCATED, &queue->flags))
>   		return;
>   
>   	page_frag_cache_drain(&queue->pf_cache);
>   
> +	/**
> +	 * Prevent memory reclaim from triggering block I/O during socket
> +	 * teardown. The socket release path fput -> tcp_close ->
> +	 * tcp_disconnect -> tcp_send_active_reset may allocate memory, and
> +	 * allowing reclaim to issue I/O could deadlock if we're being called
> +	 * from block device teardown (e.g., del_gendisk -> elevator cleanup)
> +	 * which holds locks that the I/O completion path needs.
> +	 */
> +	noio_flag = memalloc_noio_save();
>   	noreclaim_flag = memalloc_noreclaim_save();
>   	/* ->sock will be released by fput() */
>   	fput(queue->sock->file);
>   	queue->sock = NULL;
>   	memalloc_noreclaim_restore(noreclaim_flag);
> +	memalloc_noio_restore(noio_flag);
>   
>   	kfree(queue->pdu);
>   	mutex_destroy(&queue->send_mutex);

The memalloc_noreclaim_save() above shall already prevent filesystem reclaim,
so if the goal is to avoid fs_reclaim, we should not need an additional
memalloc_noio_save() here. That makes me wonder whether we are looking at the
correct code path. If this teardown path (nvme_tcp_free_queue()) is indeed executed,
it should already be avoiding filesystem reclaim in the first place.

Thanks,
--Nilay