From: Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Suzuki <suzuki@in.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-aio kvack.org" <linux-aio@kvack.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, suparna <suparna@in.ibm.com>,
akpm@osdl.org, linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Badness in __mutex_unlock_slowpath with XFS stress tests
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 09:30:42 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060309223042.GC1135@frodo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060309120306.GA26682@infradead.org>
On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 12:03:06PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:24:38PM +0530, Suzuki wrote:
> >
> > Missed out linux-aio & linux-fs-devel lists. Forwarding.
> >
> > Comments ?
>
> I've seen this too. The problem is that __generic_file_aio_read can return
> with or without the i_mutex locked in the direct I/O case for filesystems
> that set DIO_OWN_LOCKING.
Not for reads AFAICT - __generic_file_aio_read + own-locking
should always have released i_mutex at the end of the direct
read - are you thinking of writes or have I missed something?
> It's a nasty one and I haven't found a better solution
> than copying lots of code from filemap.c into xfs.
Er, eek? Hopefully thats not needed - from my reading of the
code, all the i_mutex locking for direct reads lives inside
direct-io.c, not filemap.c -- is the solution from my other
mail not workable? (isn't it only writes that has the wierd
buffered I/O fallback + i_sem/i_mutex locking interaction?).
thanks.
--
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-09 22:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-09 7:54 [RFC] Badness in __mutex_unlock_slowpath with XFS stress tests Suzuki
2006-03-09 12:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-09 12:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-09 22:30 ` Nathan Scott [this message]
2006-03-09 22:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-09 23:14 ` Nathan Scott
2006-03-10 0:50 ` Nathan Scott
2006-03-10 15:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2006-03-14 4:46 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2006-03-17 17:22 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-03-18 3:34 ` Nathan Scott
2006-03-18 5:03 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-07-10 16:46 ` Stephane Doyon
2006-07-11 0:18 ` Nathan Scott
2006-07-11 13:40 ` Stephane Doyon
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-09 7:17 Suzuki
2006-03-09 22:22 ` Nathan Scott
2006-03-10 6:06 ` Suzuki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060309223042.GC1135@frodo \
--to=nathans@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=suparna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=suzuki@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.