From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, clm@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fs: make sure to fail try_to_unlazy() and try_to_unlazy() for LOOKUP_CACHED
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 10:06:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251217100605.GT1712166@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHE5SrcUbUU8AuMCE1F_+wEUfM4o_Bp9eiYjX0jtJPUUmA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 10:11:04AM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 10:07 AM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 09:47:04AM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > > One remaining weirdness is terminate_walk() walking the symlink stack
> > > after drop_links().
> >
> > What weirdness? If we are not in RCU mode, we need to drop symlink bodies
> > *and* drop symlink references?
>
> One would expect a routine named drop_links() would handle the
> entirety of clean up of symlinks.
>
> Seeing how it only handles some of it, it should be renamed to better
> indicate what it is doing, but that's a potential clean up for later.
Take a look at the callers. All 3 of them.
1) terminate_walk(): drop all symlink bodies, in non-RCU mode drop
all paths as well.
2) a couple in legitimize_links(): *always* called in RCU mode. That's
the whole point - trying to grab references to a bunch of dentries/mounts,
so that we could continue in non-RCU mode from that point on. What should
we do if we'd grabbed some of those references, but failed halfway through
the stack?
We *can't* do path_put() there - not under rcu_read_lock(). And we can't
delay dropping the link bodies past rcu_read_unlock().
Note that this state has
nd->depth link bodies in stack, all need to be droped before
rcu_read_unlock()
first K link references in stack that need to be dropped after
rcu_read_unlock()
nd->depth - K link references in stack that do _not_ need to
be dropped.
Solution: have link bodies dropped, callbacks cleared and nd->depth
reset to K. The caller of legitimate_links() immediately drops out
of RCU mode and we proceed to terminate_walk(), same as we would
on an error in non-RCU mode.
This case is on a slow path; we could microoptimize it, but result
would be really harder to understand.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-17 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-17 8:47 [PATCH v2] fs: make sure to fail try_to_unlazy() and try_to_unlazy() for LOOKUP_CACHED Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-17 9:08 ` Al Viro
2025-12-17 9:11 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-17 10:06 ` Al Viro [this message]
2025-12-17 10:13 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-17 10:27 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-12-17 10:48 ` Al Viro
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=20251217100605.GT1712166@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=clm@meta.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
/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