Re: [PATCH] fs: avoid softlockups in s_inodes iterators

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

 



On 10/11/19 1:32 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:49:38AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> @@ -698,6 +699,13 @@ int invalidate_inodes(struct super_block *sb, bool kill_dirty)
>>  		inode_lru_list_del(inode);
>>  		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
>>  		list_add(&inode->i_lru, &dispose);
>> +
>> +		if (need_resched()) {
>> +			spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
>> +			cond_resched();
>> +			dispose_list(&dispose);
>> +			goto again;
>> +		}
>>  	}
>>  	spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
>>  
> 
> Is this equivalent to:
> 
> +		cond_resched_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock));
> 
> or is disposing of the list a crucial part here?

I think we need to dispose, or we'll start with the entire ~unmodified list again after the goto:

-Eric




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux