From: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3] vfs: add releasepages hooks to block devices which can be used by file systems
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:15:25 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4949DC6D.3050908@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081217153940.GA6495@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Hi,
> Hello,
>
> > > From: Toshiyuki Okajima <toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > >
> > > Implement blkdev_releasepage() to release the buffer_heads and page
> > > after we release private data which belongs to a client of the block
> > > device, such as a filesystem.
> > >
> > > blkdev_releasepage() call the client's releasepage() which is
> > > registered by blkdev_register_client_releasepage() to release its
> > > private data.
> Yes, this is IMO the right fix. I'm just wondering about the fact that we
> can't block in the client_releasepage(). That seems to be caused by the fact
> that we need to be protected against client_releasepage() callback changes
> which essentially means umount, right? I'm not saying I have a better solution
> but introducing such limitation seems stupid just because of umount...
>
> Honza
>
Difference between v2 and v3 in blkdev_releasepage:
< ret = (*ei->client_releasepage)(ei->client, page, wait);
< else
--
> /*
> * Since we are holding a spinlock (ei->client_lock),
> * make sure the client_releasepage function
> * understands that it must not block.
> */
> ret = (*ei->client_releasepage)(ei->client, page,
> wait & ~__GFP_WAIT);
> else
Ask for clarification.
Which of the following do you mean:
1) If using a spinlock in client_releasepage() is only for mount/umount,
this implementation is not wise.
2) There is the fact that a spinlock is necessary for blkdev_releasepage().
This fact prevents us from making various implementations of
client_releasepage().
(Without a spinlock, we can implement a client_releasepage() which can release
the buffers with a sleep. As a result, it may enable more buffers release than
before.)
There is the fact that a filesystem can be mounted on several places,
and the lock mechanism is absolutely necessary for this fact.
I also think we are sad that we cannot implement various implementations for
client_releasepage(). But now I cannot imagine what to do for
a client_releasepage() which can sleep, too...
Regards,
Toshiyuki Okajima
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-18 5:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-02 11:06 [BUG][PATCH 1/4] ext3: fix a cause of __schedule_bug via blkdev_releasepage Toshiyuki Okajima
2008-12-08 14:01 ` Theodore Tso
2008-12-08 14:06 ` [PATCH -V2] ext3: provide function to release metadata pages under memory pressure Theodore Ts'o
2008-12-08 14:06 ` [PATCH -V2] ext4: " Theodore Ts'o
2008-12-12 0:54 ` [BUG][PATCH 1/4] ext3: fix a cause of __schedule_bug via blkdev_releasepage Toshiyuki Okajima
2008-12-12 6:21 ` Theodore Tso
2008-12-12 17:52 ` [PATCH -v3] vfs: add releasepages hooks to block devices which can be used by file systems Theodore Ts'o
2008-12-12 17:52 ` [PATCH -v3] ext3: provide function to release metadata pages under memory pressure Theodore Ts'o
2008-12-12 17:52 ` [PATCH -v3] ext4: " Theodore Ts'o
2008-12-17 15:39 ` [PATCH -v3] vfs: add releasepages hooks to block devices which can be used by file systems Jan Kara
2008-12-18 5:15 ` Toshiyuki Okajima [this message]
2008-12-18 13:12 ` Jan Kara
2008-12-18 14:54 ` Theodore Tso
2008-12-18 16:38 ` Jan Kara
2008-12-19 5:15 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2008-12-26 5:01 ` Al Viro
2009-01-03 15:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2009-01-03 15:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] add releasepage " Theodore Ts'o
2009-01-03 15:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] ext3: provide function to release metadata pages under memory pressure Theodore Ts'o
2009-01-03 15:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] ext4: " Theodore Ts'o
2009-01-05 8:16 ` [PATCH 1/3] add releasepage hooks to block devices which can be used by file systems Toshiyuki Okajima
2009-01-05 16:05 ` Theodore Tso
2009-01-06 4:07 ` Toshiyuki Okajima
2009-01-06 4:29 ` Theodore Tso
2008-12-15 2:21 ` [BUG][PATCH 1/4] ext3: fix a cause of __schedule_bug via blkdev_releasepage Toshiyuki Okajima
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=4949DC6D.3050908@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=toshi.okajima@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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.