On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Yan, Zheng <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> this avoid force umount getting stuck at ceph_osdc_sync()
>
> Signed-off-by: "Yan, Zheng" <zyan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
> include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h | 5 ++++-
> net/ceph/osd_client.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
> index 3c1155803444..40664e13cc0f 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
> @@ -793,6 +793,7 @@ static void ceph_umount_begin(struct super_block *sb)
> if (!fsc)
> return;
> fsc->mount_state = CEPH_MOUNT_SHUTDOWN;
> + ceph_osdc_abort_requests(&fsc->client->osdc, -EIO);
> ceph_mdsc_force_umount(fsc->mdsc);
> return;
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h b/include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h
> index b73dd7ebe585..f61736963236 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h
> @@ -347,6 +347,7 @@ struct ceph_osd_client {
> struct rb_root linger_map_checks;
> atomic_t num_requests;
> atomic_t num_homeless;
> + int abort_code;
Why osdc->abort_code and all __submit_request() hunks are needed?
If we are in a forced umount situation, no new I/Os should be accepted
anyway.
osdc->lock taken for write in ceph_osdc_abort_requests() is enough to
lock out __submit_request().
Thanks,
Ilya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
