On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 08:20:31AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > On Mon, 04 Dec 2023, Al Viro wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 12:36:41PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > > > > This means that any cost for doing the work is not imposed on the kernel > > > thread, and importantly excessive amounts of work cannot apply > > > back-pressure to reduce the amount of new work queued. > > > > It also means that a stuck ->release() won't end up with stuck > > kernel thread... > > Is a stuck kernel thread any worse than a stuck user-space thread? > > > > > > earlier than would be ideal. When __dput (from the workqueue) calls > > > > WTF is that __dput thing? __fput, perhaps? > > Either __fput or dput :-) > ->release isn't the problem that I am seeing. > The call trace that I see causing problems is > __fput -> dput -> dentry_kill -> destroy_inode -> xfs_fs_destroy_inode What problem, exactly, are you having with xfs_fs_destroy_inode()? -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
