From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qg0-f48.google.com (mail-qg0-f48.google.com [209.85.192.48]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C306B0035 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:19:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id q108so882566qgd.21 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qc0-f173.google.com (mail-qc0-f173.google.com [209.85.216.173]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b1si933214qat.61.2014.09.16.17.19.31 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id i8so1031984qcq.4 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Layton Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:19:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove possible deadlocks in nfs_release_page() Message-ID: <20140916201929.2e355cae@tlielax.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <20140917094113.0cb07cf1@notabene.brown> References: <20140916051911.22257.24658.stgit@notabene.brown> <20140916074741.1de870c5@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <20140917094113.0cb07cf1@notabene.brown> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/Ys0zqew17SC2TGhq3/B+BHp"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: NeilBrown Cc: Jeff Layton , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Trond Myklebust , Ingo Molnar , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/Ys0zqew17SC2TGhq3/B+BHp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 09:41:13 +1000 NeilBrown wrote: > On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 07:47:41 -0400 Jeff Layton > wrote: >=20 >=20 > > Also, we call things like invalidate_complete_page2 from the cache > > invalidation code. Will we end up with potential problems now that we > > have a stronger possibility that a page might not be freeable when it > > calls releasepage? (no idea on this -- I'm just spitballing) > >=20 >=20 > Answering just this part here: > invalidate_complete_page2() is only called immediately after a call to > do_launder_page(). > For nfs, that means nfs_launder_page() was called, which calls nfs_wb_pag= e() > which in turn calls > ret =3D nfs_commit_inode(inode, FLUSH_SYNC); >=20 > so the inode is fully committed when invalidate_complete_page2 is called,= so > nfs_release_page will succeed. >=20 > So there shouldn't be a problem there. >=20 Yep, Trond pointed that out today when we were discussing it. Thanks for confirming it here though... --=20 Jeff Layton --Sig_/Ys0zqew17SC2TGhq3/B+BHp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJUGNORAAoJEAAOaEEZVoIVdxsP/iWsCXblcW/GyBvM33IWf/8D kMkX5kZKlL8qzpDI8zXssrw8f84LzwgPcWqawn9NyfGjhGcTUyWgUU3CbhGjHUWO 3Sfd1xWToc3gm75ZQQCcNSk5PhVAaProerx4c7U/G+rp4zaHylSjGCEqFhxQuw2Y sbHwewFwSq+68zcTR8U/wfZuqGl8pC2L4mz4WCmjA8lGNsLlrtC0V7Y16wgAFhSa iN5L7GWght21Mdzd8DJUdTTeG0wuU07VsWuc2eE5Xt6LYOMv3343ZFoAWbRtwOYA xuxe6t/C/Rw9lBPcyYlIAYEkgZm0UWjLE0iFbfChrLlqo2BEXt/IWnGRLSzcO+yM GAGVnqOK5wTdHKpXtIRiAFFbRVcKEcU8YDOaGRSWBw0DTx9aSgJFtzb/U756FAJq qQ7t1E/7N6GwsuwHtF2U3pNOdHI1VdmbkEU0KqAvOe8KJZkBLe2O+61gAYxBeT1h Ok8BzUyWphBK1/SSEzNtY7ERgjq5kxUhrmt7uttwKOqs9pf5yD7m4KAGDg0kbbbC bTKs+e1K5oM6OR09cu7LxRdrdV06FaMIH7x2DjCFn5ycoEGXdn5NjMwktgl+kmal tslpZ2HeyF87WoRKkvaQ+VvZ4PKOBpHG6osTTj9cseQlaDZuf+HxIOzKSMSVSRil TSB4k0+FfSv77ie7p1jq =cwpv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Ys0zqew17SC2TGhq3/B+BHp-- -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org