From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.de>
To: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Cc: a.righi@cineca.it, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Vladimir V. Saveliev" <vs@namesys.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com,
Edward Shishkin <edward@namesys.com>,
zam@clusterfs.com, ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: Fwd: Fw: [2.6.20.4] BUG: dentry xattrs still in use in shrink_dcache_for_umount() with reiserfs
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:34:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <462A2107.6060902@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <462A2055.1040509@suse.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> Andrea Righi wrote:
>> Jeff Mahoney wrote:
>>> I have the patchset that I mentioned, but I'm not proposing it for 2.6.21.
>>> It's much too invasive to be introduced in an -rc7, but it does include
>>> locking changes that I believe avoid this bug.
>>>
>>> Vladimir was right in his analysis that sometimes get_xa_root() takes the
>>> reference once and other times twice, but not for the right reasons. I save
>>> a reference to the xattr dir to avoid a lookup later, but when there are multiple
>>> getxattrs or listxattrs as the first xattr operation on the file system, we can end
>>> up taking a second reference when we shouldn't. This is because those operations
>>> are protected by read locks and the ->xattr_root pointer isn't protected by anything
>>> else. A quick fix would be to just extend the protection of the priv root's i_mutex
>>> around the assignment, and test first. The right fix involves a complete rework of
>>> the locking, and I have code to do that, it's just too late to include it in 2.6.21.
>>>
>>> I'd love to know what Andrea (and now Andi Kleen) are doing to hit this now. There
>>> haven't been any changes in this code in a while, and the shrink_dcache_for_umount()
>>> has been around since October. I'm unable to reproduce locally so far, so if Andrea
>>> or Andi could see if this fixes it for them, I'd appreciate it.
>> Jeff, your patch doesn't resolve, but you hit the problem. Actually, I
>> think the xattr_root pointer must be protected also in get_xa_root()
>> using the same private root i_mutex.
>>
>> I've tested the following patch and it resolves in my case. What do you
>> think about it? could it be a reasonable fix?
>
> Your patch fixes the problem. That'll teach me to spin a patch up while I'm headed
> out the door. I think a cleaner solution for now is just to refactor get_xa_root,
> __get_xa_root, and create_xa_root into one function to simplify the lookup and the
> locking. I think I'll add another step to my patch set that removes the caching of
> xattr_root entirely or creates in on mount, as the priv root is created. The privroot
> must be cached to avoid a deadlock on the fs-root directory's i_mutex, but xattr_root
> was cached as an optimzation. If we need to take privroot->i_mutex every time, there's
> no point in caching it since it will probably be in the dcache anyway.
>
> -Jeff
>
Ignore this patch. I missed a spot.
- -Jeff
- --
Jeff Mahoney
SUSE Labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGKiEHLPWxlyuTD7IRApRTAJ0WeJzkH7julSus9iqx+LYoAAlFOwCfahu0
4qN7BR/monh7ZcQWZ7Vmz3Y=
=UNNw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-21 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20070413095219.02075323.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <462536B2.5060308@users.sourceforge.net>
[not found] ` <c04ebacf0704180152qdc72fcdnd0755dbf070b40d2@mail.gmail.com>
2007-04-18 14:16 ` Fwd: Fw: [2.6.20.4] BUG: dentry xattrs still in use in shrink_dcache_for_umount() with reiserfs Vladimir V. Saveliev
2007-04-18 15:00 ` Jeff Mahoney
2007-04-21 0:07 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-21 1:45 ` Jeff Mahoney
2007-04-21 13:17 ` Andrea Righi
2007-04-21 14:31 ` Jeff Mahoney
2007-04-21 14:34 ` Jeff Mahoney [this message]
2007-04-21 15:26 ` [PATCH] reiserfs: fix xattr root locking/refcount bug Jeff Mahoney
2007-04-21 19:39 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-22 10:28 ` Andrea Righi
2007-04-22 20:49 ` Jeff Mahoney
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=462A2107.6060902@suse.de \
--to=jeffm@suse.de \
--cc=a.righi@cineca.it \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=edward@namesys.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=reiserfs-dev@namesys.com \
--cc=vs@namesys.com \
--cc=zam@clusterfs.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