From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu,
ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, osd-dev@open-osd.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, logfs@logfs.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 23:25:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120608222533.GS30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxbEk0k0jYtkn-H-sT0m4Fy5pH_OQZiPwCtwMvh22-3-w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:06:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. hmm. I think you may be right. Even if we do move it up, we
> probably shouldn't use it.
>
> We don't even want SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, since we do the delayed RCU
> free for other reasons anyway, so it would duplicate the RCU delaying
> and cause problems. I forgot about that little complication.
>
> We could have a separate "RCU_BARRIER_ON_DESTROY" thing, but that's
> just silly too.
Why not make that rcu_barrier() in there unconditional? Where are
we creating/destroying caches often enough for that to become a problem?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org,
codalist@TELEMANN.coda.cs.cmu.edu, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org,
osd-dev@open-osd.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, logfs@logfs.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 23:25:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120608222533.GS30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxbEk0k0jYtkn-H-sT0m4Fy5pH_OQZiPwCtwMvh22-3-w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:06:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. hmm. I think you may be right. Even if we do move it up, we
> probably shouldn't use it.
>
> We don't even want SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, since we do the delayed RCU
> free for other reasons anyway, so it would duplicate the RCU delaying
> and cause problems. I forgot about that little complication.
>
> We could have a separate "RCU_BARRIER_ON_DESTROY" thing, but that's
> just silly too.
Why not make that rcu_barrier() in there unconditional? Where are
we creating/destroying caches often enough for that to become a problem?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>,
v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>,
ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org,
osd-dev@open-osd.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
logfs@logfs.org,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 23:25:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120608222533.GS30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxbEk0k0jYtkn-H-sT0m4Fy5pH_OQZiPwCtwMvh22-3-w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:06:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. hmm. I think you may be right. Even if we do move it up, we
> probably shouldn't use it.
>
> We don't even want SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, since we do the delayed RCU
> free for other reasons anyway, so it would duplicate the RCU delaying
> and cause problems. I forgot about that little complication.
>
> We could have a separate "RCU_BARRIER_ON_DESTROY" thing, but that's
> just silly too.
Why not make that rcu_barrier() in there unconditional? Where are
we creating/destroying caches often enough for that to become a problem?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
"Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu,
ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, osd-dev@open-osd.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, logfs@logfs.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [RFC, PATCH] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 23:25:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120608222533.GS30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxbEk0k0jYtkn-H-sT0m4Fy5pH_OQZiPwCtwMvh22-3-w@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:06:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. hmm. I think you may be right. Even if we do move it up, we
> probably shouldn't use it.
>
> We don't even want SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, since we do the delayed RCU
> free for other reasons anyway, so it would duplicate the RCU delaying
> and cause problems. I forgot about that little complication.
>
> We could have a separate "RCU_BARRIER_ON_DESTROY" thing, but that's
> just silly too.
Why not make that rcu_barrier() in there unconditional? Where are
we creating/destroying caches often enough for that to become a problem?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-08 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-08 21:41 [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 21:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 21:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:00 ` [RFC, PATCH] " Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:00 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:00 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:06 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:25 ` Al Viro [this message]
2012-06-08 22:25 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:25 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:25 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:02 ` [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:02 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:02 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:14 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:14 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 22:23 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:23 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:23 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:27 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 22:25 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:25 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:25 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:27 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:27 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:27 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:31 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:31 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:31 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 22:36 ` Al Viro
2012-06-08 22:40 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 23:32 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 23:31 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 23:31 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 23:37 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-08 23:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 23:46 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 23:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-09 0:28 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 0:28 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 0:28 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 7:06 ` Marco Stornelli
2012-06-09 7:06 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Marco Stornelli
2012-06-09 7:06 ` Marco Stornelli
2012-06-09 7:06 ` Marco Stornelli
[not found] ` <4FD2F5F4.1000106-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2012-06-09 7:25 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 7:25 ` [Ocfs2-devel] " Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 7:25 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-09 7:25 ` Andrew Morton
2012-06-11 9:16 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-11 9:16 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-11 9:16 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 23:28 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 23:28 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-06-08 21:28 [RFC, PATCH] " Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 21:28 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 21:28 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2012-06-08 21:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 21:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-06-08 21:43 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20120608222533.GS30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=boyu.mt@taobao.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu \
--cc=ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=logfs@logfs.org \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=osd-dev@open-osd.org \
--cc=reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=samba-technical@lists.samba.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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.