From: npiggin@kernel.dk
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [patch 1/7] fs: mark_inode_dirty barrier fix
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:06:11 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101123140707.701911603@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20101123140610.292941494@kernel.dk
[-- Attachment #1: fs-mark_inode_dirty-barrier-fix.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1610 bytes --]
Filesystems appear to be using ->dirty_inode, expecting that the dirtying
operating is done and visible to all CPUs (eg. setting private inode dirty
bits, without any barriers themselves). So release the dirty "critical
section" with a barrier before calling ->dirty_inode.
Cost is not significantly changed, because we're just moving the barrier.
Those filesystems that do use ->dirty_inode should have to care slightly
less about barriers, which is a good thing.
Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
Index: linux-2.6/fs/fs-writeback.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2010-11-19 16:47:00.000000000 +1100
+++ linux-2.6/fs/fs-writeback.c 2010-11-19 16:49:39.000000000 +1100
@@ -934,6 +934,15 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *in
bool wakeup_bdi = false;
/*
+ * Make sure that changes are seen by all cpus before we test i_state
+ * or mark anything as being dirty. Ie. all dirty state should be
+ * written to the inode and visible. Like an "unlock" operation, the
+ * mark_inode_dirty call must "release" our ordering window that is
+ * opened when we started modifying the inode.
+ */
+ smp_mb();
+
+ /*
* Don't do this for I_DIRTY_PAGES - that doesn't actually
* dirty the inode itself
*/
@@ -942,12 +951,6 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *in
sb->s_op->dirty_inode(inode);
}
- /*
- * make sure that changes are seen by all cpus before we test i_state
- * -- mikulas
- */
- smp_mb();
-
/* avoid the locking if we can */
if ((inode->i_state & flags) == flags)
return;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-23 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-23 14:06 [patch 0/7] icache dirty / sync fixes npiggin
2010-11-23 14:06 ` npiggin [this message]
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 2/7] fs: simple fsync race fix npiggin
2010-11-29 14:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-30 0:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 3/7] fs: introduce inode writeback helpers npiggin
2010-11-29 15:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-30 0:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 4/7] fs: preserve inode dirty bits on failed metadata writeback npiggin
2010-11-29 14:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-30 0:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 5/7] fs: ext2 inode sync fix npiggin
2010-11-30 11:26 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 6/7] fs: fsync optimisations npiggin
2010-11-29 15:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-30 0:11 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-23 14:06 ` [patch 7/7] fs: fix or note I_DIRTY handling bugs in filesystems npiggin
2010-11-23 15:04 ` Steven Whitehouse
2010-11-23 22:51 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-24 0:23 ` Nick Piggin
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=20101123140707.701911603@kernel.dk \
--to=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.