linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [Patch 3.14 stable 12/16] shrink_dentry_list(): take parent's ->d_lock earlier
Date: Thu,  6 Nov 2014 11:37:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1415302640-5876-13-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1415302640-5876-1-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>

From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

The cause of livelocks there is that we are taking ->d_lock on
dentry and its parent in the wrong order, forcing us to use
trylock on the parent's one.  d_walk() takes them in the right
order, and unfortunately it's not hard to create a situation
when shrink_dentry_list() can't make progress since trylock
keeps failing, and shrink_dcache_parent() or check_submounts_and_drop()
keeps calling d_walk() disrupting the very shrink_dentry_list() it's
waiting for.

Solution is straightforward - if that trylock fails, let's unlock
the dentry itself and take locks in the right order.  We need to
stabilize ->d_parent without holding ->d_lock, but that's doable
using RCU.  And we'd better do that in the very beginning of the
loop in shrink_dentry_list(), since the checks on refcount, etc.
would need to be redone anyway.

That deals with a half of the problem - killing dentries on the
shrink list itself.  Another one (dropping their parents) is
in the next commit.

locking parent is interesting - it would be easy to do rcu_read_lock(),
lock whatever we think is a parent, lock dentry itself and check
if the parent is still the right one.  Except that we need to check
that *before* locking the dentry, or we are risking taking ->d_lock
out of order.  Fortunately, once the D1 is locked, we can check if
D2->d_parent is equal to D1 without the need to lock D2; D2->d_parent
can start or stop pointing to D1 only under D1->d_lock, so taking
D1->d_lock is enough.  In other words, the right solution is
rcu_read_lock/lock what looks like parent right now/check if it's
still our parent/rcu_read_unlock/lock the child.

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
(cherry picked from commit 046b961b45f93a92e4c70525a12f3d378bced130)
---
 fs/dcache.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
index 5cdd171..1c1b14c 100644
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -529,6 +529,38 @@ dentry_kill(struct dentry *dentry, int unlock_on_failure)
 	return dentry; /* try again with same dentry */
 }
 
+static inline struct dentry *lock_parent(struct dentry *dentry)
+{
+	struct dentry *parent = dentry->d_parent;
+	if (IS_ROOT(dentry))
+		return NULL;
+	if (likely(spin_trylock(&parent->d_lock)))
+		return parent;
+	spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
+	rcu_read_lock();
+again:
+	parent = ACCESS_ONCE(dentry->d_parent);
+	spin_lock(&parent->d_lock);
+	/*
+	 * We can't blindly lock dentry until we are sure
+	 * that we won't violate the locking order.
+	 * Any changes of dentry->d_parent must have
+	 * been done with parent->d_lock held, so
+	 * spin_lock() above is enough of a barrier
+	 * for checking if it's still our child.
+	 */
+	if (unlikely(parent != dentry->d_parent)) {
+		spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
+		goto again;
+	}
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+	if (parent != dentry)
+		spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
+	else
+		parent = NULL;
+	return parent;
+}
+
 /* 
  * This is dput
  *
@@ -803,6 +835,8 @@ static void shrink_dentry_list(struct list_head *list)
 		struct inode *inode;
 		dentry = list_entry(list->prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
 		spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
+		parent = lock_parent(dentry);
+
 		/*
 		 * The dispose list is isolated and dentries are not accounted
 		 * to the LRU here, so we can simply remove it from the list
@@ -816,6 +850,8 @@ static void shrink_dentry_list(struct list_head *list)
 		 */
 		if ((int)dentry->d_lockref.count > 0) {
 			spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
+			if (parent)
+				spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
 			continue;
 		}
 
@@ -823,6 +859,8 @@ static void shrink_dentry_list(struct list_head *list)
 		if (unlikely(dentry->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED)) {
 			bool can_free = dentry->d_flags & DCACHE_MAY_FREE;
 			spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
+			if (parent)
+				spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
 			if (can_free)
 				dentry_free(dentry);
 			continue;
@@ -832,22 +870,13 @@ static void shrink_dentry_list(struct list_head *list)
 		if (inode && unlikely(!spin_trylock(&inode->i_lock))) {
 			d_shrink_add(dentry, list);
 			spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
+			if (parent)
+				spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
 			continue;
 		}
 
-		parent = NULL;
-		if (!IS_ROOT(dentry)) {
-			parent = dentry->d_parent;
-			if (unlikely(!spin_trylock(&parent->d_lock))) {
-				if (inode)
-					spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
-				d_shrink_add(dentry, list);
-				spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
-				continue;
-			}
-		}
-
 		__dentry_kill(dentry);
+
 		/*
 		 * We need to prune ancestors too. This is necessary to prevent
 		 * quadratic behavior of shrink_dcache_parent(), but is also
-- 
1.8.3.1

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-06 19:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-06 19:37 [Patch 3.14 stable 00/16] vfs: fix dentry shrink list corruption Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 01/16] fold d_kill() and d_free() Cong Wang
2015-05-18 17:44   ` Greg KH
2015-05-21  0:31     ` [PATCH 3.14] " Vinson Lee
2015-05-21  0:31       ` [PATCH] " Vinson Lee
2015-06-29 23:56       ` [PATCH 3.14] " Greg KH
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 02/16] fold try_prune_one_dentry() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 03/16] new helper: dentry_free() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 04/16] expand the call of dentry_lru_del() in dentry_kill() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 05/16] dentry_kill(): don't try to remove from shrink list Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 06/16] don't remove from shrink list in select_collect() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 07/16] more graceful recovery in umount_collect() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 08/16] dcache: don't need rcu in shrink_dentry_list() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 09/16] lift the "already marked killed" case into shrink_dentry_list() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 10/16] split dentry_kill() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 11/16] expand dentry_kill(dentry, 0) in shrink_dentry_list() Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` Cong Wang [this message]
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 13/16] dealing with the rest of shrink_dentry_list() livelock Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 14/16] dentry_kill() doesn't need the second argument now Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 15/16] dcache: add missing lockdep annotation Cong Wang
2014-11-06 19:37 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 16/16] lock_parent: don't step on stale ->d_parent of all-but-freed one Cong Wang
2015-02-03 23:11 ` [Patch 3.14 stable 00/16] vfs: fix dentry shrink list corruption Greg KH
2015-02-04  3:30   ` Cong Wang

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=1415302640-5876-13-git-send-email-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    --to=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).