From: Javier Barrio <javier.barrio.mart@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] quota: Lock s_umount in exclusive mode for Q_XQUOTA{ON,OFF} quotactls.
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 19:49:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8850e693-5f4d-4582-3bcd-f3a2bf3144c8@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181214095613.GD8896@quack2.suse.cz>
El 14/12/18 a las 10:56, Jan Kara escribió:
Hi,
>> This patch locks the superblock ->s_umount sem. in exclusive mode for all Q_XQUOTAON/OFF
>> quotactls too in addition to Q_QUOTAON/OFF.
> Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me but let me run it past XFS
> people. Looking at XFS code they definitely do not *need* s_umount in
> exclusive mode for Q_XQUOTAON/OFF (they have their private mutex for
> the exclusion). Shared mode they currently get is enough for them. But
> exclusive mode is fine for them as well AFAICT and it would be easier if
> all quota backends had the same locking rules wrt VFS locks. XFS guys, any
> objections to switching Q_XQUOTAON/OFF handlers from having s_umount locked
> for read to having it locked exclusive?
Thanks, great! I agree.
FWIW, XFS as of now *can* be called while holding s_umount exclusive with the
generic quotactl(Q_QUOTAON/OFF) commands, even though that code path is probably
not exercised in practice (from a quick look xfs-tests/xfs_quota etc always
use the Q_X* variants).
> Honza
>
>> AFAICT, other than ext4, only xfs and ocfs2 are affected by this change.
>> The VFS will now call in xfs_quota_* functions with s_umount held, which wasn't the case
>> before. This looks good to me but I can not say for sure. Ext4 and ocfs2 where already
>> beeing called with s_umount exclusive via quota_quotaon/off which is basically the same.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Javier Barrio <javier.barrio.mart@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>
>> [ I'm not familiar with this code, please excuse me if this is not the right fix ]
>>
>> fs/quota/quota.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/quota/quota.c b/fs/quota/quota.c
>> index f0cbf58ad4da..fd5dd806f1b9 100644
>> --- a/fs/quota/quota.c
>> +++ b/fs/quota/quota.c
>> @@ -791,7 +791,8 @@ static int quotactl_cmd_write(int cmd)
>> /* Return true if quotactl command is manipulating quota on/off state */
>> static bool quotactl_cmd_onoff(int cmd)
>> {
>> - return (cmd == Q_QUOTAON) || (cmd == Q_QUOTAOFF);
>> + return (cmd == Q_QUOTAON) || (cmd == Q_QUOTAOFF) ||
>> + (cmd == Q_XQUOTAON) || (cmd == Q_XQUOTAOFF);
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> -- 2.17.1
>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-14 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-13 0:06 [PATCH] quota: Lock s_umount in exclusive mode for Q_XQUOTA{ON,OFF} quotactls Javier Barrio
2018-12-14 9:56 ` Jan Kara
2018-12-14 18:49 ` Javier Barrio [this message]
2018-12-20 8:20 ` Jan Kara
2018-12-20 18:33 ` Javier Barrio
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=8850e693-5f4d-4582-3bcd-f3a2bf3144c8@gmail.com \
--to=javier.barrio.mart@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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).