From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dcache shrink list corruption?
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:18:51 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140429211851.GA32204@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140429191015.GK18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 08:10:15PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 07:16:10PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 08:03:24PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >
> > > Introducing a new per-sb lock should be OK.
> > >
> > > Another idea, which could have subtler effects, is simply not to kill
> > > a dentry that is on the shrink list (indicated by
> > > DCACHE_SHRINK_LIST), since it's bound to get killed anyway. But
> > > that's a change in behaviour...
> >
> > Umm... You mean, if final dput() finds dentry already on shrink list,
> > just leave it there and return? Might get really painful - the code
> > that knows it's holding the last reference to already unhashed dentry
> > might get a nasty surprise when dput() returns before it's killed off.
>
> I wonder if we could have dput() side of thinks check if we are on the
> shrink list, mark it "I'll be killing it anyway" and go ahead without
> removal from the shrink list and instead of freeing mark it "I'm done
> with it". With shrink_dentry_list(), on the other hand, checking for those
> marks, treating the former as "just move it to private list and keep
> going". After the list of victims is dealt with, keep picking dentries
> from the second list, wait for them to get the second mark and do actual
> freeing. That ought to avoid any extra locks and preserve all ordering,
> except for that of kmem_cache_free(), AFAICS...
>
> Comments?
Seems like it would work, but it seems fragile to me - I'm
wondering how we can ensure that the private shrink list
manipulations can be kept private.
We have a similar situation with the inode cache (private shrink
list) but the I_FREEING flag is set the entire time the inode is on
the shrink list. Any new hash lookup or attempt to grab the inode
that occurs while I_FREEING is set fails, so perhaps dentries also
need a well defined "being torn down and freed" state where new
references cannot be taken even though the dentry can still be
found...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-29 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-29 16:01 dcache shrink list corruption? Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-29 17:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-29 18:03 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-29 18:16 ` Al Viro
2014-04-29 19:10 ` Al Viro
2014-04-29 21:18 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2014-04-29 21:48 ` Al Viro
2014-04-29 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-29 23:20 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 2:31 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 2:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 4:04 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 15:49 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-30 15:56 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-30 16:03 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 17:33 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-30 18:36 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 18:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-04-30 19:02 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 19:59 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 20:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 20:38 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 20:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 21:12 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 22:12 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 23:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 23:43 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-01 2:51 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 2:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-01 3:12 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 9:42 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-05-01 14:34 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 21:02 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 21:05 ` Al Viro
2014-05-01 22:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 8:43 ` Szeredi Miklos
2014-05-02 21:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-30 23:38 ` Al Viro
2014-04-30 9:15 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-05-02 5:51 ` Al Viro
2014-05-02 9:00 ` Szeredi Miklos
2014-05-02 21:02 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-05-02 21:08 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-05-02 21:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 22:40 ` Al Viro
2014-05-02 23:06 ` Al Viro
2014-05-03 4:26 ` Al Viro
2014-05-03 18:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-03 18:25 ` Al Viro
2014-05-03 18:21 ` Al Viro
2014-05-04 6:29 ` Al Viro
2014-05-06 10:17 ` Miklos Szeredi
2014-05-06 14:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-06 16:52 ` Al Viro
2014-05-06 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-06 19:15 ` Al Viro
2014-05-02 22:32 ` Al Viro
2014-04-29 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-04-29 17:56 ` Al Viro
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=20140429211851.GA32204@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).