From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru>
Cc: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
devel@openvz.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] incorrect error handling inside generic_file_direct_write
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 01:52:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061212015232.eacfbb46.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bqm9tie3.fsf@sw.ru>
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:20:52 +0300
Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru> wrote:
> > XFS (at least) can call generic_file_direct_write() with i_mutex not held.
> > And vmtruncate() expects i_mutex to be held.
> >
> > I guess a suitable solution would be to push this problem back up to the
> > callers: let them decide whether to run vmtruncate() and if so, to ensure
> > that i_mutex is held.
> >
> > The existence of generic_file_aio_write_nolock() makes that rather messy
> > though.
> This means we may call generic_file_aio_write_nolock() without i_mutex, right?
> but call trace is :
> generic_file_aio_write_nolock()
> ->generic_file_buffered_write() /* i_mutex not held here */
> but according to filemaps locking rules: mm/filemap.c:77
> ..
> * ->i_mutex (generic_file_buffered_write)
> * ->mmap_sem (fault_in_pages_readable->do_page_fault)
> ..
> I'm confused a litle bit, where is the truth?
xfs_write() calls generic_file_direct_write() without taking i_mutex for
O_DIRECT writes.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru>
Cc: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <devel@openvz.org>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] incorrect error handling inside generic_file_direct_write
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 01:52:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061212015232.eacfbb46.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bqm9tie3.fsf@sw.ru>
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:20:52 +0300
Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru> wrote:
> > XFS (at least) can call generic_file_direct_write() with i_mutex not held.
> > And vmtruncate() expects i_mutex to be held.
> >
> > I guess a suitable solution would be to push this problem back up to the
> > callers: let them decide whether to run vmtruncate() and if so, to ensure
> > that i_mutex is held.
> >
> > The existence of generic_file_aio_write_nolock() makes that rather messy
> > though.
> This means we may call generic_file_aio_write_nolock() without i_mutex, right?
> but call trace is :
> generic_file_aio_write_nolock()
> ->generic_file_buffered_write() /* i_mutex not held here */
> but according to filemaps locking rules: mm/filemap.c:77
> ..
> * ->i_mutex (generic_file_buffered_write)
> * ->mmap_sem (fault_in_pages_readable->do_page_fault)
> ..
> I'm confused a litle bit, where is the truth?
xfs_write() calls generic_file_direct_write() without taking i_mutex for
O_DIRECT writes.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru>
Cc: Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
devel@openvz.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] incorrect error handling inside generic_file_direct_write
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 01:52:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061212015232.eacfbb46.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bqm9tie3.fsf@sw.ru>
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 15:20:52 +0300
Dmitriy Monakhov <dmonakhov@sw.ru> wrote:
> > XFS (at least) can call generic_file_direct_write() with i_mutex not held.
> > And vmtruncate() expects i_mutex to be held.
> >
> > I guess a suitable solution would be to push this problem back up to the
> > callers: let them decide whether to run vmtruncate() and if so, to ensure
> > that i_mutex is held.
> >
> > The existence of generic_file_aio_write_nolock() makes that rather messy
> > though.
> This means we may call generic_file_aio_write_nolock() without i_mutex, right?
> but call trace is :
> generic_file_aio_write_nolock()
> ->generic_file_buffered_write() /* i_mutex not held here */
> but according to filemaps locking rules: mm/filemap.c:77
> ..
> * ->i_mutex (generic_file_buffered_write)
> * ->mmap_sem (fault_in_pages_readable->do_page_fault)
> ..
> I'm confused a litle bit, where is the truth?
xfs_write() calls generic_file_direct_write() without taking i_mutex for
O_DIRECT writes.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-12 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-11 13:34 [PATCH] incorrect error handling inside generic_file_direct_write Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-11 13:34 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-11 12:38 ` [Devel] " Kirill Korotaev
2006-12-11 12:38 ` Kirill Korotaev
2006-12-11 20:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-11 20:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-11 20:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 9:22 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 9:22 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 9:22 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 6:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 6:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 6:36 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 12:20 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 12:20 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 12:20 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 9:52 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-12-12 9:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 9:52 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 13:18 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 13:18 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 10:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 10:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 10:40 ` Andrew Morton
2006-12-12 23:14 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-12 23:14 ` Dmitriy Monakhov
2006-12-13 2:43 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-13 2:43 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-13 2:43 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-15 10:43 ` 'Christoph Hellwig'
2006-12-15 10:43 ` 'Christoph Hellwig'
2006-12-15 18:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-15 18:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-12-15 18:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2007-01-02 11:17 ` 'Christoph Hellwig'
2007-01-02 11:17 ` 'Christoph Hellwig'
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=20061212015232.eacfbb46.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=devel@openvz.org \
--cc=dmonakhov@openvz.org \
--cc=dmonakhov@sw.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.