From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4FD2F5F4.1000106@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2012 09:06:28 +0200
From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH,
 RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super()
 to filesystems
References: <1339191663-17693-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20120608150253.e42464a6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <20120608221446.GA18250@otc-wbsnb-06>
 <20120608152550.258d6a30.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <20120608222734.GT30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20120608153120.b722d7c3.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <20120608233127.GB18981@otc-wbsnb-06>
 <20120608163751.7a8ec2bc.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
 <CA+55aFw5k3daxeoZb9H1HGcOCWjPF+d7inSbf0QHmG-atp4reQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120608172842.9826b5cd.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120608172842.9826b5cd.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>,
 linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
 linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, codalist@telemann.coda.cs.cmu.edu,
 linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org,
 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
 linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
 fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>,
 ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org,
 Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net,
 samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, logfs@logfs.org,
 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
 linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
 linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, osd-dev@open-osd.org
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

Il 09/06/2012 02:28, Andrew Morton ha scritto:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:46:47 -0700 Linus Torvalds<torvalds@linux-foundation.org>  wrote:
>
>> Of course, if you just mean having a VFS wrapper that does
>>
>>      static void vfs_inode_kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
>>      {
>>          rcu_barrier();
>>          kmem_cache_destroy(cachep);
>>      }
>>
>> then we could do that. Not much better than what Kirill's patch did,
>> but at least we could have that comment in just one single place.
>
> That's conceptually what I meant.  But it has the problem that new and
> out-of-tree filesystems might forget to do it.  Which is why I suggest
> adding a kmem_cache* argument to unregister_filesystem() for this.
>
> It's a bit awkward, and the fs can pass in NULL if it knows what it's
> doing.  But it's reliable.
> --

The call of rcu_barrier should be mandatory for the "unload fs module" 
problem, right? If the fs is compiled statically maybe we could avoid 
it, but (eventually) this kind of decision is per-fs, so this could be a 
clue that the call of rcu_barrier maybe is inside each fs not in VFS.

Marco