From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: When to lock pipe->rd_wait.lock?
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 11:17:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230921-nahen-ausklammern-aa91c8f49a1c@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKPOu+9RC6XCKh0a0HNEFmjPCn8n=BvGwRHk13hJKWD2N_+OcQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 10:05:24AM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:28 AM Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com> wrote:
> > I had another look at this, and something's fishy with the code or
> > with your explanation (or I still don't get it). If there is a
> > watch_queue, pipe_write() fails early with EXDEV - writing to such a
> > pipe is simply forbidden, the code is not reachable in the presence of
> > a watch_queue, therefore locking just because there might be a
> > wait_queue does not appear to make sense?
>
> Meanwhile I have figured that the spinlock in pipe_write() is
> obsolete. It was added by David as preparation for the notification
> feature, but the notification was finally merged, it had the EXDEV,
> and I believe it was not initially planned to implement it that way?
It was supposed to get write support most likely but never got it.
Good catch.
> So I believe the spinlock is really not necessary (anymore) and I have
For pipe_write() it isn't we still need it for pipe_read().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-21 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-20 12:34 When to lock pipe->rd_wait.lock? Max Kellermann
2023-09-20 13:30 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-20 15:21 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-20 15:50 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-20 16:14 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-21 7:28 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-21 8:05 ` Max Kellermann
2023-09-21 9:17 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2023-09-21 9:38 ` Max Kellermann
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=20230921-nahen-ausklammern-aa91c8f49a1c@brauner \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.kellermann@ionos.com \
--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).