From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E8851FBC92 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:37:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741909070; cv=none; b=Q5FUOpNL58t4LKjz4W14Sd3kM3NdtFD9SV2EP7XswzRXzcg7dSjrFZKf1yi0cUy43YqveXzQhj/AnfInI7nvZGdGGmQL4wieHkl1bgTeSljBNYLnXwaX8N2B378DuDQdzQvIGPeWFU5M5tZeso/exec2t130vpsZDxKHlMth+ug= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741909070; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2GsUSaYmaoLRbFEciljwa2mCFWQ4cSDvmrFWJ/xZA64=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date:Message-ID; b=EubPjoNJ+xFDDXqCnsdPitecxdMIYRC4RnhLcrZ/BNI3DWw6djJbA/I1XiD5RXWLWpq27+Mz0nMhhB6HyVwREQ8QN4GJdEc3bMvq4kuIDosX7l/duj+bt0r4gGhm0t02RBvHNN3QOYFCnQL9oTrT+Gqzm8+jAQq7ZVSlWY/1nEg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=TKN/tD/s; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="TKN/tD/s" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1741909067; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xBD7a+UasP1I2w1kgH35J+2aChRyv9wNX5h+9iuQ3JU=; b=TKN/tD/sqqTMDo+Kr2Ags2vNbYqlu6tpPZFfQnhynIWfAab7A41etk8M1NXf8fN2Htk9rF p03gNcGLPDlKznX45Sx3CfY03sljkmv+UPnegfjDFidbCpx7d9SbFXexs6rJoLafyaIgb6 YbPzN4d703gXit4PUYZnvYC6NaiRclk= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-280-AqL3zhagOWmuehWFIDOjqA-1; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 19:37:40 -0400 X-MC-Unique: AqL3zhagOWmuehWFIDOjqA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: AqL3zhagOWmuehWFIDOjqA_1741909058 Received: from mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D900180AF4C; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:37:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.42.28.61]) by mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE68218001F6; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:37:35 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <756af030a5085152f923e41b84746930b464af5d.camel@kernel.org> References: <756af030a5085152f923e41b84746930b464af5d.camel@kernel.org> <3cc1ac78a01be069f79dcf82e2f3e9bfe28d9a4b.camel@dubeyko.com> <1385372.1741861062@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <1468676.1741898867@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Jeff Layton Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, slava@dubeyko.com, Alex Markuze , Xiubo Li , Ilya Dryomov , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Slava.Dubeyko@ibm.com Subject: Re: Does ceph_fill_inode() mishandle I_NEW? Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1675538.1741909054.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:37:35 +0000 Message-ID: <1675539.1741909055@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.93 Jeff Layton wrote: > I don't think that can happen. An I_NEW inode hasn't been properly > hashed yet, so nothing should be able to find it until > unlock_new_inode() is called. That's not where the issue lies. I'm talking about *after* I_NEW has been cleared. Imagine you have a file that has hard links in several directories. Can simultaneous lookup on a number of those hard links result in you going through ceph_fill_inode() a number of times in parallel? David