From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] ovl: Introduce read/write barriers around metacopy flag update
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:24:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171016132453.GB31318@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxj1eUq8OWaG4-Fw4Kx2v6jB4p5bwaU6S-iJU7j9vTwEhQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 09:05:17AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
[..]
> > When I read memory-barrier.txt, it seems to suggest that RELEASE can let
> > instructions outside critical region sneak into critical region. If that's
> > the case, actually clearing of metaflag can happen before xattr actually
> > got removed. Though I can't think what will go wrong in that case.
>
> clear_bit takes a spinlock so I *think* clearing of flag cannot sneak
> before removing xattr.
Which spinlock does clear_bit take? Are you referring to ovl_inode->lock mutex?
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-16 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-10 15:32 [RFC PATCH 0/9][V3] overlayfs: Delayed copy up of data Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 1/9] ovl: ovl_check_setxattr() get rid of redundant -EOPNOTSUPP check Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 2/9] ovl: During copy up, first copy up metadata and then data Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 3/9] ovl: Provide a mount option metacopy=on/off for metadata copyup Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 1:36 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-11 13:57 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 16:29 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-11 16:53 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 17:36 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-11 18:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 20:29 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-12 13:23 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-12 13:39 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 4/9] ovl: Copy up only metadata during copy up where it makes sense Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 5/9] ovl: Set xattr OVL_XATTR_METACOPY on upper file Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 17:03 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-11 20:16 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 20:44 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 6/9] ovl: Fix ovl_getattr() to get number of blocks from lower Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 7/9] ovl: Introduce read/write barriers around metacopy flag update Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 17:12 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-11 20:27 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-11 21:08 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-13 18:27 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-14 6:05 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-14 7:00 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-16 13:24 ` Vivek Goyal
2017-10-16 13:24 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2017-10-16 13:31 ` Amir Goldstein
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 8/9] ovl: Set OVL_METACOPY flag during ovl_lookup() Vivek Goyal
2017-10-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 9/9] ovl: Return lower dentry if only metadata copy up took place Vivek Goyal
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=20171016132453.GB31318@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/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).