All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Fan Wu <fanwu01@zju.edu.cn>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, chenridong@huawei.com,
	driver-core@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernfs: recheck of->released after acquiring the active reference
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 07:46:06 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoc9XplwfHGjQym4@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260820021810.163082-1-fanwu01@zju.edu.cn>

Hello,

On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 02:18:10AM +0000, Fan Wu wrote:
> @@ -73,12 +73,22 @@ static struct kernfs_open_node *of_on(struct kernfs_open_file *of)
>  /* Get active reference to kernfs node for an open file */
>  static struct kernfs_open_file *kernfs_get_active_of(struct kernfs_open_file *of)
>  {
> -	/* Skip if file was already released */
> -	if (unlikely(of->released))
> +	if (!kernfs_get_active(of->kn))
>  		return NULL;
>  
> -	if (!kernfs_get_active(of->kn))
> +	/*
> +	 * @of->released is set under kernfs_open_file_mutex.  While the
> +	 * active reference is held, @kn can't be drained anymore and
> +	 * kernfs_fop_release() can't run, so re-reading @of->released
> +	 * here settles whether @of was released for good.
> +	 */
> +	mutex_lock(kernfs_open_file_mutex_ptr(of->kn));
> +	if (unlikely(of->released)) {
> +		mutex_unlock(kernfs_open_file_mutex_ptr(of->kn));
> +		kernfs_put_active(of->kn);
>  		return NULL;
> +	}
> +	mutex_unlock(kernfs_open_file_mutex_ptr(of->kn));

"lock -> test something -> unlock" pattern is usually unnecessary. What's
the mutex achieving doing? Doesn't kernfs_get_active() already have strong
enough memory barrier? If not, it'd be better to solve it by iterlocking
kernfs_get_active() and released clearing.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-20 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-20  2:18 [PATCH] kernfs: recheck of->released after acquiring the active reference Fan Wu
2026-08-20 17:46 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2026-08-21  5:07   ` [PATCH v2] " Fan Wu
2026-08-21 19:21     ` Tejun Heo
2026-08-23 12:27     ` kernel test robot
2026-08-23 12:27     ` kernel test robot

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=aoc9XplwfHGjQym4@slm.duckdns.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=chenridong@huawei.com \
    --cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=fanwu01@zju.edu.cn \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.