From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] fs/super.c: don't fool lockdep in freeze_super() and thaw_super() paths
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:08:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160926160806.GB6748@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160926160724.GA6739@redhat.com>
sb_wait_write()->percpu_rwsem_release() fools lockdep to avoid the
false-positives. Now that xfs was fixed by Dave's commit dbad7c993053
("xfs: stop holding ILOCK over filldir callbacks") we can remove it and
change freeze_super() and thaw_super() to run with s_writers.rw_sem
locks held; we add two trivial helpers for that, sb_freeze_release()
and sb_freeze_acquire().
xfstests-dev/check `grep -il freeze tests/*/???` does not trigger any
warning from lockdep.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
fs/super.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 2549896c..a9757e1 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -1214,25 +1214,34 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sb_start_write);
static void sb_wait_write(struct super_block *sb, int level)
{
percpu_down_write(sb->s_writers.rw_sem + level-1);
- /*
- * We are going to return to userspace and forget about this lock, the
- * ownership goes to the caller of thaw_super() which does unlock.
- *
- * FIXME: we should do this before return from freeze_super() after we
- * called sync_filesystem(sb) and s_op->freeze_fs(sb), and thaw_super()
- * should re-acquire these locks before s_op->unfreeze_fs(sb). However
- * this leads to lockdep false-positives, so currently we do the early
- * release right after acquire.
- */
- percpu_rwsem_release(sb->s_writers.rw_sem + level-1, 0, _THIS_IP_);
}
-static void sb_freeze_unlock(struct super_block *sb)
+/*
+ * We are going to return to userspace and forget about these locks, the
+ * ownership goes to the caller of thaw_super() which does unlock().
+ */
+static void sb_freeze_release(struct super_block *sb)
+{
+ int level;
+
+ for (level = SB_FREEZE_LEVELS - 1; level >= 0; level--)
+ percpu_rwsem_release(sb->s_writers.rw_sem + level, 0, _THIS_IP_);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Tell lockdep we are holding these locks before we call ->unfreeze_fs(sb).
+ */
+static void sb_freeze_acquire(struct super_block *sb)
{
int level;
for (level = 0; level < SB_FREEZE_LEVELS; ++level)
percpu_rwsem_acquire(sb->s_writers.rw_sem + level, 0, _THIS_IP_);
+}
+
+static void sb_freeze_unlock(struct super_block *sb)
+{
+ int level;
for (level = SB_FREEZE_LEVELS - 1; level >= 0; level--)
percpu_up_write(sb->s_writers.rw_sem + level);
@@ -1328,6 +1337,7 @@ int freeze_super(struct super_block *sb)
* when frozen is set to SB_FREEZE_COMPLETE, and for thaw_super().
*/
sb->s_writers.frozen = SB_FREEZE_COMPLETE;
+ sb_freeze_release(sb);
up_write(&sb->s_umount);
return 0;
}
@@ -1354,11 +1364,14 @@ int thaw_super(struct super_block *sb)
goto out;
}
+ sb_freeze_acquire(sb);
+
if (sb->s_op->unfreeze_fs) {
error = sb->s_op->unfreeze_fs(sb);
if (error) {
printk(KERN_ERR
"VFS:Filesystem thaw failed\n");
+ sb_freeze_release(sb);
up_write(&sb->s_umount);
return error;
}
--
2.5.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-26 16:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-26 16:07 [PATCH 0/2] (Was: BUG_ON in rcu_sync_func triggered) Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-26 16:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs/super.c: fix race between freeze_super() and thaw_super() Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-26 16:11 ` Jan Kara
2016-09-26 16:08 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2016-09-26 16:18 ` [PATCH 2/2] fs/super.c: don't fool lockdep in freeze_super() and thaw_super() paths Jan Kara
2016-09-26 16:55 ` [PATCH V2 " Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-27 6:51 ` Jan Kara
2016-09-27 7:14 ` Dave Chinner
2016-09-27 17:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-09-30 17:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-02 21:42 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-03 16:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 11:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 11:48 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-06 13:44 ` Johannes Weiner
2016-10-07 16:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 20:03 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-05 16:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-04 19:44 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-05 16:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-06 7:27 ` Jan Kara
2016-10-06 17:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-06 21:59 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-07 17:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-07 22:52 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-09 16:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-10 1:02 ` Dave Chinner
2016-10-13 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-10-13 17:10 ` [PATCH 0/2] (Was: BUG_ON in rcu_sync_func triggered) Oleg Nesterov
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=20160926160806.GB6748@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kernel@kyup.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).