On Tue 15-10-19 21:36:08, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 10/15/19 2:37 AM, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Mon 14-10-19 16:30:24, 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 in cases where it already exists. > >> > >> One loop 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> > > > > Thanks Eric. The patch looks good to me. You can add: > > > > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > > thanks > > > BTW, I suppose you need to add Al to pickup the patch? > > Yeah (cc'd now) > > But it was just pointed out to me that if/when the majority of inodes > at umount time have i_count == 0, we'll never hit the resched in > fsnotify_unmount_inodes() and may still have an issue ... Yeah, that's a good point. So that loop will need some further tweaking (like doing iget-iput dance in need_resched() case like in some other places). Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR
