From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@opendz.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: add missing mutex lock arround notify_change
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 02:06:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111219020637.GA1653@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111219020340.GG2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 02:03:40AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> OK, I'm definitely missing something. The very first thing
> xfs_file_aio_write_checks() does is
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> which really makes me wonder how the hell does that manage to avoid an
> instant deadlock in case of call via xfs_file_buffered_aio_write()
> where we have:
> struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
> struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
> struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode);
> *iolock = XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL;
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, *iolock);
> ret = xfs_file_aio_write_checks(file, &pos, &count, new_size, iolock);
> which leads to
> struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
> struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode);
> (IOW, inode and ip are the same as in the caller) followed by
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> and with both xfs_rw_ilock() calls turning into
> mutex_lock(&VFS_I(ip)->i_mutex);
> xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> we ought to deadlock on that i_mutex. What am I missing and how do we manage
> to survive that?
Arrrgh... OK, I see... What I missed is that XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL is not
XFS_ILOCK_EXCL. Nice naming, that...
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@opendz.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>,
Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: add missing mutex lock arround notify_change
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 02:06:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111219020637.GA1653@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111219020340.GG2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 02:03:40AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> OK, I'm definitely missing something. The very first thing
> xfs_file_aio_write_checks() does is
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> which really makes me wonder how the hell does that manage to avoid an
> instant deadlock in case of call via xfs_file_buffered_aio_write()
> where we have:
> struct address_space *mapping = file->f_mapping;
> struct inode *inode = mapping->host;
> struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode);
> *iolock = XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL;
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, *iolock);
> ret = xfs_file_aio_write_checks(file, &pos, &count, new_size, iolock);
> which leads to
> struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host;
> struct xfs_inode *ip = XFS_I(inode);
> (IOW, inode and ip are the same as in the caller) followed by
> xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> and with both xfs_rw_ilock() calls turning into
> mutex_lock(&VFS_I(ip)->i_mutex);
> xfs_ilock(ip, XFS_ILOCK_EXCL);
> we ought to deadlock on that i_mutex. What am I missing and how do we manage
> to survive that?
Arrrgh... OK, I see... What I missed is that XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL is not
XFS_ILOCK_EXCL. Nice naming, that...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-19 2:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-16 11:25 [PATCH] mm: add missing mutex lock arround notify_change Djalal Harouni
2011-12-16 11:25 ` Djalal Harouni
2011-12-16 20:55 ` Andrew Morton
2011-12-16 20:55 ` Andrew Morton
2011-12-16 21:54 ` Djalal Harouni
2011-12-16 21:54 ` Djalal Harouni
2011-12-17 21:41 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 21:41 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 22:10 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 22:10 ` Al Viro
2011-12-20 22:09 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-20 22:09 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-20 22:09 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-20 22:45 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-20 22:45 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-12-19 1:43 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-19 1:43 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-19 2:03 ` Al Viro
2011-12-19 2:03 ` Al Viro
2011-12-19 2:06 ` Al Viro [this message]
2011-12-19 2:06 ` Al Viro
2011-12-19 5:07 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-19 5:07 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-19 4:22 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-19 4:22 ` Dave Chinner
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=20111219020637.GA1653@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=tixxdz@opendz.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.