All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
	Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>, Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm for fs: add truncate_pagecache_range
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:50:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120325135002.185b4caf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1203251254570.1505@eggly.anvils>

On Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:

> Building a test kernel quickly told me that inode->i_mapping->i_mutex
> doesn't exist, of course it's inode->i_mutex.
> 
> Then running the test kernel quickly told me that neither ext4 nor xfs
> (I didn't try ocfs2) holds inode->i_mutex where holepunching calls
> truncate_inode_pages_range().
> 
> Now, there might or might not be reasons why ext4 or xfs ought to hold
> i_mutex there for its own consistency, but it's beyond me to determine
> that: let's assume they're correct without evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Stabilizing i_size is not a reason: holepunching does not affect i_size
> and is not affected by i_size (okay, ext4 still has the bug I reported
> a couple of months ago, whereby its holepunching stops at i_size,
> forgetting blocks fallocated beyond; but no doubt that will get fixed).
> 
> And nothing that truncate_pagecache_range() does needs i_mutex:
> neither the unmap_mapping_range() nor the truncate_inode_pages_range()
> needs i_mutex.  A year ago, yes, Miklos showed how unmap_mapping_range()
> was relying on mutex serialization, and added an additional mutex for
> that, which Peter was able to remove once he mutified i_mmap_lock.
> 
> truncate_pagecache_range() is just a drop-in replacement for
> truncate_inode_pages_range(), and has no different locking needs.

Does anything prevent new pages from getting added to pagecache and
perhaps faulted into VMAs after or during the execution of these
functions?

Also, I wonder what prevents pages in the range from being dirtied
between ext4_ext_punch_hole()'s filemap_write_and_wait_range() and
truncate_inode_pages_range().

--
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: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>,
	Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>, Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@suse.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm for fs: add truncate_pagecache_range
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:50:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120325135002.185b4caf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1203251254570.1505@eggly.anvils>

On Sun, 25 Mar 2012 13:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:

> Building a test kernel quickly told me that inode->i_mapping->i_mutex
> doesn't exist, of course it's inode->i_mutex.
> 
> Then running the test kernel quickly told me that neither ext4 nor xfs
> (I didn't try ocfs2) holds inode->i_mutex where holepunching calls
> truncate_inode_pages_range().
> 
> Now, there might or might not be reasons why ext4 or xfs ought to hold
> i_mutex there for its own consistency, but it's beyond me to determine
> that: let's assume they're correct without evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Stabilizing i_size is not a reason: holepunching does not affect i_size
> and is not affected by i_size (okay, ext4 still has the bug I reported
> a couple of months ago, whereby its holepunching stops at i_size,
> forgetting blocks fallocated beyond; but no doubt that will get fixed).
> 
> And nothing that truncate_pagecache_range() does needs i_mutex:
> neither the unmap_mapping_range() nor the truncate_inode_pages_range()
> needs i_mutex.  A year ago, yes, Miklos showed how unmap_mapping_range()
> was relying on mutex serialization, and added an additional mutex for
> that, which Peter was able to remove once he mutified i_mmap_lock.
> 
> truncate_pagecache_range() is just a drop-in replacement for
> truncate_inode_pages_range(), and has no different locking needs.

Does anything prevent new pages from getting added to pagecache and
perhaps faulted into VMAs after or during the execution of these
functions?

Also, I wonder what prevents pages in the range from being dirtied
between ext4_ext_punch_hole()'s filemap_write_and_wait_range() and
truncate_inode_pages_range().

  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-25 20:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-23 20:46 [PATCH] mm for fs: add truncate_pagecache_range Hugh Dickins
2012-03-23 20:46 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-23 21:01 ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-23 21:01   ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-23 21:14   ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-23 21:14     ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-23 22:59     ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-23 22:59       ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-25 20:26       ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-25 20:26         ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-25 20:50         ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-03-25 20:50           ` Andrew Morton
2012-03-25 21:55           ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-25 21:55             ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-03  5:45         ` Joel Becker
2012-04-03  5:45           ` Joel Becker
2012-05-13 21:03 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-05-13 21:03   ` Hugh Dickins
2012-05-17  9:25   ` Joel Becker
2012-05-17  9:25     ` Joel Becker

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=20120325135002.185b4caf.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
    --cc=bpm@sgi.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=elder@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mfasheh@suse.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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.