From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>,
linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>, Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm: Protect operations adding pages to page cache with invalidate_lock
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 13:21:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210517112115.GC31755@quack2.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210514161730.GL9675@magnolia>
On Fri 14-05-21 09:17:30, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 09:19:45AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > We've been down this path before more than a decade ago when the
> > powers that be decreed that inode locking order is to be "by
> > structure address" rather than inode number, because "inode number
> > is not unique across multiple superblocks".
> >
> > I'm not sure that there is anywhere that locks multiple inodes
> > across different superblocks, but here we are again....
>
> Hm. Are there situations where one would want to lock multiple
> /mappings/ across different superblocks? The remapping code doesn't
> allow cross-super operations, so ... pipes and splice, maybe? I don't
> remember that code well enough to say for sure.
Splice and friends work one file at a time. I.e., first they fill a pipe
from the file with ->read_iter, then they flush the pipe to the target file
with ->write_iter. So file locking doesn't get coupled there.
> I've been operating under the assumption that as long as one takes all
> the same class of lock at the same time (e.g. all the IOLOCKs, then all
> the MMAPLOCKs, then all the ILOCKs, like reflink does) that the
> incongruency in locking order rules within a class shouldn't be a
> problem.
That's my understanding as well.
> > > It might simply be time to convert all
> > > three XFS inode locks to use the same ordering rules.
> >
> > Careful, there lie dragons along that path because of things like
> > how the inode cluster buffer operations work - they all assume
> > ascending inode number traversal within and across inode cluster
> > buffers and hence we do have locking order constraints based on
> > inode number...
>
> Fair enough, I'll leave the ILOCK alone. :)
OK, so should I change the order for invalidate_lock or shall we just leave
that alone as it is not a practical problem AFAICT.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@wdc.com>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Thumshirn <jth@kernel.org>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 03/11] mm: Protect operations adding pages to page cache with invalidate_lock
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 13:21:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210517112115.GC31755@quack2.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210514161730.GL9675@magnolia>
On Fri 14-05-21 09:17:30, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 09:19:45AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > We've been down this path before more than a decade ago when the
> > powers that be decreed that inode locking order is to be "by
> > structure address" rather than inode number, because "inode number
> > is not unique across multiple superblocks".
> >
> > I'm not sure that there is anywhere that locks multiple inodes
> > across different superblocks, but here we are again....
>
> Hm. Are there situations where one would want to lock multiple
> /mappings/ across different superblocks? The remapping code doesn't
> allow cross-super operations, so ... pipes and splice, maybe? I don't
> remember that code well enough to say for sure.
Splice and friends work one file at a time. I.e., first they fill a pipe
from the file with ->read_iter, then they flush the pipe to the target file
with ->write_iter. So file locking doesn't get coupled there.
> I've been operating under the assumption that as long as one takes all
> the same class of lock at the same time (e.g. all the IOLOCKs, then all
> the MMAPLOCKs, then all the ILOCKs, like reflink does) that the
> incongruency in locking order rules within a class shouldn't be a
> problem.
That's my understanding as well.
> > > It might simply be time to convert all
> > > three XFS inode locks to use the same ordering rules.
> >
> > Careful, there lie dragons along that path because of things like
> > how the inode cluster buffer operations work - they all assume
> > ascending inode number traversal within and across inode cluster
> > buffers and hence we do have locking order constraints based on
> > inode number...
>
> Fair enough, I'll leave the ILOCK alone. :)
OK, so should I change the order for invalidate_lock or shall we just leave
that alone as it is not a practical problem AFAICT.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-17 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-12 13:46 [PATCH 0/11 v5] fs: Hole punch vs page cache filling races Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 01/11] mm: Fix comments mentioning i_mutex Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 02/11] documentation: Sync file_operations members with reality Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 03/11] mm: Protect operations adding pages to page cache with invalidate_lock Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 14:20 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-12 14:20 ` [f2fs-dev] " Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-13 17:49 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-13 17:49 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 14:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-12 14:40 ` [f2fs-dev] " Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-13 19:01 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-13 19:01 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-13 19:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-13 19:38 ` [f2fs-dev] " Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-14 11:07 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-14 11:07 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 15:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-12 15:23 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-13 17:44 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-13 17:44 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-13 18:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-13 18:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-13 23:19 ` Dave Chinner
2021-05-13 23:19 ` [f2fs-dev] " Dave Chinner
2021-05-14 16:17 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-14 16:17 ` [f2fs-dev] " Darrick J. Wong
2021-05-17 11:21 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2021-05-17 11:21 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-18 22:36 ` Dave Chinner
2021-05-18 22:36 ` [f2fs-dev] " Dave Chinner
2021-05-19 10:57 ` Jan Kara
2021-05-19 10:57 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 04/11] ext4: Convert to use mapping->invalidate_lock Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 05/11] ext2: Convert to using invalidate_lock Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 06/11] xfs: Convert to use invalidate_lock Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 07/11] zonefs: Convert to using invalidate_lock Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-13 0:34 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-05-13 0:34 ` [f2fs-dev] " Damien Le Moal
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 08/11] f2fs: " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 18:00 ` kernel test robot
2021-05-12 18:00 ` kernel test robot
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 09/11] fuse: " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 10/11] ceph: Fix race between hole punch and page fault Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 15:19 ` Jeff Layton
2021-05-12 15:19 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jeff Layton
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 11/11] cifs: " Jan Kara
2021-05-12 13:46 ` [f2fs-dev] " Jan Kara
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=20210517112115.GC31755@quack2.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=damien.lemoal@wdc.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=jth@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=sfrench@samba.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yuchao0@huawei.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.