From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim()
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 12:15:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100316191529.GQ6709@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1268764995.3098.23.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 02:43:15PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 11:10 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 01:35:54PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 10:17 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:51:30AM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/delegation.c b/fs/nfs/delegation.c
> > > > > index 2563beb..a77c735 100644
> > > > > --- a/fs/nfs/delegation.c
> > > > > +++ b/fs/nfs/delegation.c
> > > > > @@ -37,8 +37,10 @@ static void nfs_free_delegation(struct nfs_delegation *delegation)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct rpc_cred *cred;
> > > > >
> > > > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > > > > cred = rcu_dereference(delegation->cred);
> > > > > rcu_assign_pointer(delegation->cred, NULL);
> > > >
> > > > The lock is probably held here, in which case something like the
> > > > following would work well without needing the artificial rcu_read_lock()
> > > > and rcu_read_unlock():
> > >
> > > No. The lock is not held here. At this point, the delegation has been
> > > detached from the inode that pointed to it, and so we can free up its
> > > contents.
> >
> > OK. Is there some reference counter or pointer that can be checked to
> > verify that this data structure really is in a state that prevents
> > RCU readers from finding it?
>
> Yes. The RCU readers are supposed to grab the delegation->lock and then
> check the contents of the delegation->inode.
So would something like the following work, then?
cred = rcu_dereference_check(delegation->cred,
delegation->inode == NULL);
Or would some other check condition be more appropriate?
Thanx, Paul
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-16 19:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-16 11:51 [PATCH] NFS: Fix RCU warnings in nfs_inode_return_delegation_noreclaim() David Howells
2010-03-16 13:07 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-16 16:37 ` David Howells
2010-03-16 17:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-16 17:35 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-16 17:40 ` David Howells
2010-03-16 18:41 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-16 18:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-16 18:43 ` Trond Myklebust
2010-03-16 19:15 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
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=20100316191529.GQ6709@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@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