public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>, Ted Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>,
	linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] fs: Establish locking order for unrelated directories
Date: Mon, 29 May 2023 14:41:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230529124131.gbb3fmhrspl332i6@quack3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230526-polarstern-herrichten-32fc46c63bfc@brauner>

On Fri 26-05-23 11:45:15, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:16:10PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Currently the locking order of inode locks for directories that are not
> > in ancestor relationship is not defined because all operations that
> > needed to lock two directories like this were serialized by
> > sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex. However some filesystems need to lock two
> > subdirectories for RENAME_EXCHANGE operations and for this we need the
> > locking order established even for two tree-unrelated directories.
> > Provide a helper function lock_two_inodes() that establishes lock
> > ordering for any two inodes and use it in lock_two_directories().
> > 
> > CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > ---
> >  fs/inode.c    | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  fs/internal.h |  2 ++
> >  fs/namei.c    |  4 ++--
> >  3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> > index 577799b7855f..2015fa50d34a 100644
> > --- a/fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/inode.c
> > @@ -1103,6 +1103,40 @@ void discard_new_inode(struct inode *inode)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(discard_new_inode);
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * lock_two_inodes - lock two inodes (may be regular files but also dirs)
> > + *
> > + * Lock any non-NULL argument. The caller must make sure that if he is passing
> > + * in two directories, one is not ancestor of the other.  Zero, one or two
> > + * objects may be locked by this function.
> > + *
> > + * @inode1: first inode to lock
> > + * @inode2: second inode to lock
> > + * @subclass1: inode lock subclass for the first lock obtained
> > + * @subclass2: inode lock subclass for the second lock obtained
> > + */
> > +void lock_two_inodes(struct inode *inode1, struct inode *inode2,
> > +		     unsigned subclass1, unsigned subclass2)
> > +{
> > +	if (!inode1 || !inode2)
> > +		goto lock;
> 
> Before this change in
> 
> lock_two_nondirectories(struct inode *inode1, struct inode *inode2)
> 
> the swap() would cause the non-NULL inode to always be locked with
> I_MUTEX_NONDIR2. Now it can be either I_MUTEX_NORMAL or I_MUTEX_NONDIR2.
> Is that change intentional?

Kind of. I don't think we really care so I didn't bother to complicate the
code for this. If you think keeping the lockdep class consistent is worth
it, I can modify the patch...

								Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-29 15:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-25 10:16 [PATCH 0/6] fs: Fix directory corruption when moving directories Jan Kara
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 1/6] ext4: Remove ext4 locking of moved directory Jan Kara
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 2/6] Revert "udf: Protect rename against modification of moved directory" Jan Kara
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 3/6] Revert "f2fs: fix potential corruption when moving a directory" Jan Kara
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 4/6] fs: Establish locking order for unrelated directories Jan Kara
2023-05-26  9:45   ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-29 12:41     ` Jan Kara [this message]
2023-05-30 12:42       ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 5/6] fs: Lock moved directories Jan Kara
2023-05-25 10:16 ` [PATCH 6/6] fs: Restrict lock_two_nondirectories() to non-directory inodes Jan Kara
2023-05-26 12:13   ` Amir Goldstein
2023-05-29 12:42     ` Jan Kara
2023-05-26 15:58 ` [PATCH 0/6] fs: Fix directory corruption when moving directories Christian Brauner
2023-05-31 14:09   ` Christian Brauner

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=20230529124131.gbb3fmhrspl332i6@quack3 \
    --to=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    /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