From: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 00/12] ovl: narrow regions protected by directory i_rw_sem
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 08:54:56 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250624230636.3233059-1-neil@brown.name> (raw)
This series of patches for overlayfs is primarily focussed on preparing
for some proposed changes to directory locking. In the new scheme we
wil lock individual dentries in a directory rather than the whole
directory.
ovl currently will sometimes lock a directory on the upper filesystem
and do a few different things while holding the lock. This is
incompatible with the new scheme.
This series narrows the region of code protected by the directory lock,
taking it multiple times when necessary. This theoretically open up the
possibilty of other changes happening on the upper filesytem between the
unlock and the lock. To some extent the patches guard against that by
checking the dentries still have the expect parent after retaking the
lock. In general, I think ovl would have trouble if upperfs were being
changed independantly, and I don't think the changes here increase the
problem in any important way.
The first patch in this series doesn't exactly match the above, but it
does relate to directory locking and I think it is a sensible
simplificaiton.
I have tested this with fstests, both generic and unionfs tests. I
wouldn't be surprised if I missed something though, so please review
carefully.
After this series (with any needed changes) lands I will resubmit my
change to vfs_rmdir() behaviour to have it drop the lock on error. ovl
will be much better positioned to handle that change. It will come with
the new "lookup_and_lock" API that I am proposing.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[PATCH 01/12] ovl: use is_subdir() for testing if one thing is a
[PATCH 02/12] ovl: Call ovl_create_temp() and ovl_create_index()
[PATCH 03/12] ovl: narrow the locked region in ovl_copy_up_workdir()
[PATCH 04/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_create_upper()
[PATCH 05/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_clear_empty()
[PATCH 06/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_create_over_whiteout()
[PATCH 07/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_rename()
[PATCH 08/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_cleanup_whiteouts()
[PATCH 09/12] ovl: whiteout locking changes
[PATCH 10/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_check_rename_whiteout()
[PATCH 11/12] ovl: change ovl_create_real() to receive dentry parent
[PATCH 12/12] ovl: rename ovl_cleanup_unlocked() to ovl_cleanup()
next reply other threads:[~2025-06-24 23:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-24 22:54 NeilBrown [this message]
2025-06-24 22:54 ` [PATCH 01/12] ovl: use is_subdir() for testing if one thing is a subdir of another NeilBrown
2025-06-25 14:54 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-25 21:45 ` NeilBrown
2025-06-24 22:54 ` [PATCH 02/12] ovl: Call ovl_create_temp() and ovl_create_index() without lock held NeilBrown
2025-06-25 15:44 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-25 16:02 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-28 3:08 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-06-24 22:54 ` [PATCH 03/12] ovl: narrow the locked region in ovl_copy_up_workdir() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 19:07 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 04/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_create_upper() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 17:55 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-25 18:17 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 05/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_clear_empty() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 18:22 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 06/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_create_over_whiteout() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 19:08 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 07/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_rename() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 18:30 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-07-02 2:16 ` NeilBrown
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 08/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_cleanup_whiteouts() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 18:35 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 09/12] ovl: whiteout locking changes NeilBrown
2025-06-25 18:54 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-07-02 2:21 ` NeilBrown
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 10/12] ovl: narrow locking in ovl_check_rename_whiteout() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 19:04 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-07-02 2:41 ` NeilBrown
2025-07-02 10:04 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-07-02 10:23 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 11/12] ovl: change ovl_create_real() to receive dentry parent NeilBrown
2025-06-25 19:05 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-24 22:55 ` [PATCH 12/12] ovl: rename ovl_cleanup_unlocked() to ovl_cleanup() NeilBrown
2025-06-25 18:57 ` Amir Goldstein
2025-06-25 14:56 ` [PATCH 00/12] ovl: narrow regions protected by directory i_rw_sem Amir Goldstein
2025-06-25 21:35 ` NeilBrown
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=20250624230636.3233059-1-neil@brown.name \
--to=neil@brown.name \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--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).