From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5 v2] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 05:01:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100527040120.GX31073@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100527015335.GD1395@dastard>
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:53:35AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 09:12:14AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:41:16AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> ....
> > > Nitpick but I prefer just the restart label wher it is previously. This
> > > is moving setup for the next iteration into the "error" case.
> >
> > Ok, will fix.
> ....
> > > Would you just elaborate on the lock order problem somewhere? (the
> > > comment makes it look like we *could* take the mutex if we wanted
> > > to).
> >
> > The shrinker is unregistered in deactivate_locked_super() which is
> > just before ->kill_sb is called. The sb->s_umount lock is held at
> > this point. hence is the shrinker is operating, we will deadlock if
> > we try to lock it like this:
> >
> > unmount: shrinker:
> > down_read(&shrinker_lock);
> > down_write(&sb->s_umount)
> > unregister_shrinker()
> > down_write(&shrinker_lock)
> > prune_super()
> > down_read(&sb->s_umount);
> > (deadlock)
> >
> > hence if we can't get the sb->s_umount lock in prune_super(), then
> > the superblock must be being unmounted and the shrinker should abort
> > as the ->kill_sb method will clean up everything after the shrinker
> > is unregistered. Hence the down_read_trylock().
Um... Maybe I'm dumb, but what's wrong with doing unregistration from
deactivate_locked_super(), right after the call of ->kill_sb()? At that
point ->s_umount is already dropped, so we won't deadlock at all.
Shrinker rwsem will make sure that all shrinkers-in-progress will run
to completion, so we won't get a superblock freed under prune_super().
I don't particulary mind down_try_read() in prune_super(), but why not
make life obviously safer?
Am I missing something here?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-27 4:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-25 8:53 [PATCH 0/5] Per superblock shrinkers V2 Dave Chinner
2010-05-25 8:53 ` [PATCH 1/5] inode: Make unused inode LRU per superblock Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:17 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 23:01 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 2:04 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 4:02 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 4:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 22:54 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28 10:07 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-25 8:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm: add context argument to shrinker callback Dave Chinner
2010-05-25 8:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] superblock: introduce per-sb cache shrinker infrastructure Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:41 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-26 23:12 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 1:53 ` [PATCH 3/5 v2] " Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 4:01 ` Al Viro [this message]
2010-05-27 6:17 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 6:46 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 2:19 ` [PATCH 3/5] " Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 4:07 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 4:24 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 6:35 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 22:40 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28 5:19 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-31 6:39 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-31 7:28 ` Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-27 23:01 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-25 8:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] superblock: add filesystem shrinker operations Dave Chinner
2010-05-27 20:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-25 8:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: make use of new shrinker callout Dave Chinner
2010-05-26 16:44 ` [PATCH 0/5] Per superblock shrinkers V2 Nick Piggin
2010-05-27 20:32 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-28 0:30 ` Dave Chinner
2010-05-28 7:42 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2010-07-02 12:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-12 2:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-12 2:52 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20100527040120.GX31073@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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 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).