Re: [PATCH] CIFS: Use invalidate_inode_pages2 instead of invalidate_remote_inode (try #2)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2011/3/15 Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:21:50 +0300
> Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Use invalidate_inode_pages2 that don't leave pages even if shrink_page_list()
>> has a temp ref on them. It prevents a data coherency problem on exclusive
>> oplocks opens.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Shilovsky <piastry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  fs/cifs/inode.c |   16 +++++++++++-----
>>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/cifs/inode.c b/fs/cifs/inode.c
>> index 589f3e3..0011e95 100644
>> --- a/fs/cifs/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/cifs/inode.c
>> @@ -1687,12 +1687,18 @@ cifs_invalidate_mapping(struct inode *inode)
>>
>>       cifs_i->invalid_mapping = false;
>>
>> -     /* write back any cached data */
>> -     if (inode->i_mapping && inode->i_mapping->nrpages != 0) {
>> -             rc = filemap_write_and_wait(inode->i_mapping);
>> -             mapping_set_error(inode->i_mapping, rc);
>> +     if (inode->i_mapping) {
>> +             /* write back any cached data */
>> +             if (inode->i_mapping->nrpages != 0) {
>> +                     rc = filemap_write_and_wait(inode->i_mapping);
>> +                     mapping_set_error(inode->i_mapping, rc);
>> +             }
>> +             rc = invalidate_inode_pages2(inode->i_mapping);
>> +             if (rc)
>> +                     cERROR(1, "%s: could not invalidate inode %p", __func__,
>> +                            inode);
>>       }
>> -     invalidate_remote_inode(inode);
>> +
>>       cifs_fscache_reset_inode_cookie(inode);
>>  }
>>
>
> I think using invalidate_inode_pages2 is the right thing to do. I'm not
> so keen however on simply popping a printk when that fails. The user is
> going to see that and say "huh?"
>
> I think we need to consider allowing EBUSY bubble up to userspace
> appropriately. Otherwise we still risk data coherency problems, right?
> Perhaps cifs_invalidate_mapping should be changed to an int return and
> the callers could return errors from it?
>

I like this idea. I can recreate the patch if nobody objects.

-- 
Best regards,
Pavel Shilovsky.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux