Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems

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

 



Il 09/06/2012 02:28, Andrew Morton ha scritto:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 16:46:47 -0700 Linus Torvalds<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  wrote:

Of course, if you just mean having a VFS wrapper that does

     static void vfs_inode_kmem_cache_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
     {
         rcu_barrier();
         kmem_cache_destroy(cachep);
     }

then we could do that. Not much better than what Kirill's patch did,
but at least we could have that comment in just one single place.

That's conceptually what I meant.  But it has the problem that new and
out-of-tree filesystems might forget to do it.  Which is why I suggest
adding a kmem_cache* argument to unregister_filesystem() for this.

It's a bit awkward, and the fs can pass in NULL if it knows what it's
doing.  But it's reliable.
--

The call of rcu_barrier should be mandatory for the "unload fs module" problem, right? If the fs is compiled statically maybe we could avoid it, but (eventually) this kind of decision is per-fs, so this could be a clue that the call of rcu_barrier maybe is inside each fs not in VFS.

Marco
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[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