From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@ionos.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 20/21] __dentry_kill(): new locking scheme
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 21:55:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260121215550.GD3183987@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKPOu+9=AV-NxJYXjwiUL4iXPH=oUSF25+6t25M8ujfj2OvHVQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 08, 2025 at 06:45:14AM +0200, Max Kellermann wrote:
> I believe the busy-wait was accidental.
> I've been trying to make you aware that this is effectively a
> busy-wait, one that can take a long time burning CPU cycles, but I
> have a feeling I can't reach you.
>
> Al, please confirm that it was your intention to busy-wait until dying
> dentries disappear!
It's not so much an intention as having nothing good to wait on.
Theoretically, there's a way to deal with that - dentry in the middle
of stuck iput() from dentry_unlink_inode() from __dentry_kill() is
guaranteed to be
* negative
* unhashed
* not in-lookup
What we could do is adding an hlist_head aliased with ->d_alias, ->d_rcu
and ->d_in_lookup_hash. Then select_collect2() running into a dentry
with negative refcount would set _that_ as victim and bugger off, same
as we do for ones on shrink lists.
shrink_dcache_parent() would do this:
if (data.victim) {
struct dentry *v = data.victim;
spin_lock(&v->d_lock);
if (v->d_lockref.count < 0 &&
!(v->d_flags & DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED)) {
init_completion(&data.completion);
hlist_add_head(&data.node, &v->d_new_field);
spin_unlock(&v->d_lock);
rcu_read_unlock();
wait_for_completion(&data.completion);
} else if (!lock_for_kill(data.victim)) {
spin_unlock(&data.victim->d_lock);
rcu_read_unlock();
} else {
shrink_kill(data.victim);
}
and dentry_unlist() -
dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED;
while (unlikely(dentry->d_new_field.first)) {
struct select_data *p;
p = hlist_entry(dentry->d_new_field.first,
struct select_data,
node);
hlist_del_init(&p->node);
complete(&p->complete);
}
...
AFAICS, that ought to be safe and would guaratee progress on each
iteration in shrink_dcache_parent() (note that finding negative
refcount and seeing that it had already been past dentry_unlist()
would mean falling through to lock_for_kill() and instantly
failing there; in any case, that dentry definitely won't be
found on any subsequent d_walk(), so we still get progress there).
Comments?
next parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-21 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAKPOu+8kLwwG4aKiArX2pKq-jroTgq0MSWW2AC1SjO-G9O_Aog@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20250707204918.GK1880847@ZenIV>
[not found] ` <CAKPOu+9qpqSSr300ZDduXRbj6dwQo8Cp2bskdS=gfehcVx-=ug@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20250707205952.GL1880847@ZenIV>
[not found] ` <CAKPOu+8zjtLkjYzCCVyyC80YgekMws4vGOvnPLjvUiQ6zWaqaA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20250707213214.GM1880847@ZenIV>
[not found] ` <CAKPOu+-JxtBnjxiLDXWFNQrD=4dR_KtJbvEdNEzJA33ZqKGuAw@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20250707221917.GO1880847@ZenIV>
[not found] ` <20250707223753.GQ1880847@ZenIV>
[not found] ` <CAKPOu+9=AV-NxJYXjwiUL4iXPH=oUSF25+6t25M8ujfj2OvHVQ@mail.gmail.com>
2026-01-21 21:55 ` Al Viro [this message]
2026-01-22 6:24 ` [PATCH v3 20/21] __dentry_kill(): new locking scheme 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=20260121215550.GD3183987@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=max.kellermann@ionos.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