From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Eric Chanudet <echanude@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>,
Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH RESEND 1/1] fs/namespace: defer free_mount from namespace_unlock
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 22:09:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y8m/ljQUJOefsD6O@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230119211455.498968-2-echanude@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 04:14:55PM -0500, Eric Chanudet wrote:
> From: Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>
>
> Use call_rcu to defer releasing the umount'ed or detached filesystem
> when calling namepsace_unlock().
>
> Calling synchronize_rcu_expedited() has a significant cost on RT kernel
> that default to rcupdate.rcu_normal_after_boot=1.
>
> For example, on a 6.2-rt1 kernel:
> perf stat -r 10 --null --pre 'mount -t tmpfs tmpfs mnt' -- umount mnt
> 0.07464 +- 0.00396 seconds time elapsed ( +- 5.31% )
>
> With this change applied:
> perf stat -r 10 --null --pre 'mount -t tmpfs tmpfs mnt' -- umount mnt
> 0.00162604 +- 0.00000637 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.39% )
>
> Waiting for the grace period before completing the syscall does not seem
> mandatory. The struct mount umount'ed are queued up for release in a
> separate list and no longer accessible to following syscalls.
Again, NAK. If a filesystem is expected to be shut down by umount(2),
userland expects it to have been already shut down by the time the
syscall returns.
It's not just visibility in namespace; it's "can I pull the disk out?".
Or "can the shutdown get to taking the network down?", for that matter.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-19 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-19 21:14 [RFC PATCH RESEND 0/1] fs/namespace: defer free_mount from namespace_unlock Eric Chanudet
2023-01-19 21:14 ` [RFC PATCH RESEND 1/1] " Eric Chanudet
2023-01-19 22:09 ` Al Viro [this message]
2023-01-20 8:43 ` Alexander Larsson
2023-01-30 2:57 ` kernel test robot
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=Y8m/ljQUJOefsD6O@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ahalaney@redhat.com \
--cc=alexl@redhat.com \
--cc=echanude@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).