From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>,
Mace Moneta <moneta.mace@gmail.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com>,
"Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at fs/dcache.c:648! with v3.11-7890-ge5c832d
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 04:56:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130911035636.GI13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyGEzptqWOL1P+iqqPNOomsbKzHVy1+zBQ3pE21_=KXWA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 08:22:56PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com> wrote:
> >
> > I need to clean up some comments in the code. The other thing that I want to
> > do is to introduce read_seqlock/read_sequnlock() primitives that do the
> > locking without incrementing the sequence number.
>
> I don't understand. That's the whole *point* of sequence numbers. The
> read-locker doesn't ever change the number, only the write-locker
> does.
>
> So I don't see what you would change.
I do. What we need on the second pass (one where we currently
take seq_writelock()) is exclusion against writers; nothing we are
doing is worth disturbing the readers - we don't change any data
structures. And simple grabbing the spinlock, without touching the
sequence number would achieve exactly that. Writers will have to
wait and won't be able to disturb us, readers won't notice anything
happening. So yes, this extra primitive does make sense here.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-11 3:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-10 17:14 kernel BUG at fs/dcache.c:648! with v3.11-7890-ge5c832d Josh Boyer
2013-09-10 17:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-10 17:39 ` Josh Boyer
2013-09-10 17:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-10 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <CAMfhy93EoDohCrV+ykj6b+R9QSCTdiPtvSpJpe3SH=ot_1LWMg@mail.gmail.com>
2013-09-10 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <CAMfhy92u1GFvTrO+8SNp8hoEBEHcd7Z-3mw+79rv8+2yYqa+ow@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <CAMfhy90vEu2_hfoOnzB+ZOit4HNmKex2WObmztcY7R4+PBwd7w@mail.gmail.com>
2013-09-10 20:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-10 21:51 ` Josh Boyer
2013-09-11 1:48 ` Waiman Long
2013-09-11 3:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-11 3:56 ` Al Viro [this message]
2013-09-11 4:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-10 18:43 ` Al Viro
2013-09-10 19:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-09-10 19:13 ` Al Viro
2013-09-10 19:27 ` 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=20130911035636.GI13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=jwboyer@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=moneta.mace@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=waiman.long@hp.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.