On Tue 27-11-18 13:16:34, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> After we drop the i_pages lock, the inode can be freed at any time.
> The get_unlocked_entry() code has no choice but to reacquire the lock,
> so it can't be used here. Create a new wait_entry_unlocked() which takes
> care not to acquire the lock or dereference the address_space in any way.
>
> Fixes: c2a7d2a11552 ("filesystem-dax: Introduce dax_lock_mapping_entry()")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The patch looks good. You can add:
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Just one nit below:
> +/*
> + * The only thing keeping the address space around is the i_pages lock
> + * (it's cycled in clear_inode() after removing the entries from i_pages)
> + * After we call xas_unlock_irq(), we cannot touch xas->xa.
> + */
> +static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> +{
> + struct wait_exceptional_entry_queue ewait;
> + wait_queue_head_t *wq;
> +
> + init_wait(&ewait.wait);
> + ewait.wait.func = wake_exceptional_entry_func;
> +
> + wq = dax_entry_waitqueue(xas, entry, &ewait.key);
> + prepare_to_wait_exclusive(wq, &ewait.wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> + xas_unlock_irq(xas);
> + schedule();
> + finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
Can we add a comment here like:
/*
* Entry lock waits are exclusive. Wake up the next waiter since we
* aren't sure we will acquire the entry lock and thus wake the
* next waiter up on unlock.
*/
Because I always wonder for a moment why this is needed.
> + if (waitqueue_active(wq))
> + __wake_up(wq, TASK_NORMAL, 1, &ewait.key);
> +}
> +
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
