On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:34:45PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 10/11/19 12:29 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:49:38AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> Anything that walks all inodes on sb->s_inodes list without rescheduling > >> risks softlockups. > >> > >> Previous efforts were made in 2 functions, see: > >> > >> c27d82f fs/drop_caches.c: avoid softlockups in drop_pagecache_sb() > >> ac05fbb inode: don't softlockup when evicting inodes > >> > >> but there hasn't been an audit of all walkers, so do that now. This > >> also consistently moves the cond_resched() calls to the bottom of each > >> loop. > >> > >> One remains: remove_dquot_ref(), because I'm not quite sure how to deal > >> with that one w/o taking the i_lock. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > You've got iput cleanups in here and cond_resched()'s. I feel like this is a > > missed opportunity to pad your patch count. Thanks, > > yeah, I was going to suggest that I could split it out into 3 > (move cond_rescheds, clean up iputs, add new rescheds) if there was a > request. But it seemed a bit ridiculously granular. Find by me > if desired, tho. > > So, was that a request? I think just two patches, one for the iputs and one for the resched changes. Thanks, Josef
