On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 01:39:34PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 20:52:56 +0800 Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > If there are some mount points(not exported for nfs) under pseudo root,
> > after client's operation of those entry under the root, anyone *can't*
> > unmount those mount points until export cache expired.
> >
> > /nfs/xfs *(rw,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
> > /nfs/pnfs *(rw,insecure,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)
> > total 0
> > drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 84 Apr 21 22:27 pnfs
> > drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 84 Apr 21 22:27 test
> > drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 6 Apr 20 22:01 xfs
> > Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
> > ......
> > /dev/sdd 1038336 32944 1005392 4% /nfs/pnfs
> > /dev/sdc 10475520 32928 10442592 1% /nfs/xfs
> > /dev/sde 999320 1284 929224 1% /nfs/test
> > /mnt/pnfs/:
> > total 0
> > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 0 Apr 21 22:23 attr
> > drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 6 Apr 21 22:19 tmp
> >
> > /mnt/xfs/:
> > total 0
> > umount: /nfs/test/: target is busy
> > (In some cases useful info about processes that
> > use the device is found by lsof(8) or fuser(1).)
> >
> > It's caused by exports cache of nfsd holds the reference of
> > the path (here is /nfs/test/), so, it can't be umounted.
> >
> > I don't think that's user expect, they want umount /nfs/test/.
> > Bruce think user can also umount /nfs/pnfs/ and /nfs/xfs.
> >
> > Also, using kzalloc for all memory allocating without kmalloc.
> > Thanks for Al Viro's commets for the logic of fs_pin.
> >
> > v3,
> > 1. using path_get_pin/path_put_unpin for path pin
> > 2. using kzalloc for memory allocating
> >
> > v4,
> > 1. add a completion for pin_kill waiting the reference is decreased to zero.
> > 2. add a work_struct for pin_kill decreases the reference indirectly.
> > 3. free svc_export/svc_expkey in pin_kill, not svc_export_put/svc_expkey_put.
> > 4. svc_export_put/svc_expkey_put go though pin_kill logic.
> >
> > v5, same as v4.
> >
> > v6,
> > 1. Pin vfsmnt to mount point at first, when reference increace (==2),
> > grab a reference to vfsmnt by mntget. When decreace (==1),
> > drop the reference to vfsmnt, left pin.
> > 2. Delete cache_head directly from cache_detail.
> >
> > v7,
> > implement self reference increase and decrease for nfsd exports/expkey
> >
> > When reference of cahce_head increase(>1), grab a reference of mnt once.
> > and reference decrease to 1 (==1), drop the reference of mnt.
> >
> > So after that,
> > When ref > 1, user cannot umount the filesystem with -EBUSY.
> > when ref ==1, means cache only reference by nfsd cache,
> > no other reference. So user can try umount,
> > 1. before set MNT_UMOUNT (protected by mount_lock), nfsd cache is
> > referenced (ref > 1, legitimize_mntget), umount will fail with -EBUSY.
> > 2. after set MNT_UMOUNT, nfsd cache is referenced (ref == 2),
> > legitimize_mntget will fail, and set cache to CACHE_NEGATIVE,
> > and the reference will be dropped, re-back to 1.
> > So, pin_kill can delete the cache and umount success.
> > 3. when umountting, no reference to nfsd cache,
> > pin_kill can delete the cache and umount success.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Wow.... this is turning out to be a lot more complex that I imagined at
> first (isn't that always the way!).
>
> There is a lot of good stuff here, but I think we can probably make it
> simpler and so even better.
I'm still not convinced that the expkey should have a dentry reference
in the key in the first place. Fixing that would fix the immediate
problem.
(Though it might still be useful to have a way to do stuff on umount of
an exported filesystem.)
--b.
>
> I particularly don't like the get_ref/put_ref pointers in cache_head.
> They make cache_head a lot bigger than it was before, and they are only
> needed for two specific caches. And then they are the same for every element
> in the cache.
>
> I also don't like the ref_mutex ... or I don't like where it is used...
> or something. I definitely don't think we need one per cached entry.
> Maybe one per cache.
>
> I can certainly see that the "first" time we get a reference to a cache
> item that holds a vfsmnt pointer, we need to "legitimize" that - or
> fail. But I don't think that has to happen inside the cache.c
> machinery.
>
> How about this:
> - add a new cache flag "CACHE_ACTIVE" (for example) which the cache
> owner can set whenever it likes. When cache_put finds that CACHE_ACTIVE
> is set when refcount is <= 2, it calls a new cache_detail method: cache_deactivate.
> - cache_deactivate takes a mutex (yes, we do need one, don't we)
> and if CACHE_ACTIVE is still set and refcount is still <= 2,
> it drops the reference on the vfsmnt and clears CACHE_ACTIVE.
> This actually needs to be something like:
> if (test_and_clear_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE,...)) {
> if (atomic_read(..refcnt) > 2) {
> set_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE);
> mutex_unlock()
> return
>
> so that if other code gets a reference and tests CACHE_ACTIVE, it
> won't suddenly become inactive. Might need a memory barrier in there...
> no, test_and_clear implies a memory barrier.
>
> We only need to make changes to svc_export and svc_expkey - right?
> So that would be:
> Change svc_export_lookup and svc_expkey_lookup so they look something
> like:
>
> svc_XX_lookup(struct cache_detail *cd, struct svc_XXX *item)
> {
> struct cache_head *ch;
> int hash = svc_XXX_hash(item);
>
> ch = sunrpc_cache_lookup(cd, &item->h, hash);
> if (!ch)
> return NULL;
> item = container_of(ch, struct svc_XXX, h);
> if (!test_bit(CACHE_VALID, &ch->flags) ||
> test_bit(CACHE_NEGATIVE, &ch->flags) ||
> test_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &ch->flags))
> return item;
>
> mutex_lock(&svc_XXX_mutex);
> if (!test_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &ch->flags)) {
> if (legitimize_mnt_get() == NULL) {
> XXX_put(item);
> item = NULL;
> } else
> set_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &ch->flags);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&something);
> return item;
> }
>
> Then the new 'cache_deactivate' function is something like:
>
> svc_XXX_deactivate(struct cache_detail *cd, struct cache_head *ch)
> {
> struct svc_XXX *item = container_of(ch, &item->h, item);
>
> mutex_lock(&svc_XXX_mutex);
> if (test_and_clear_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &ch->flags)) {
> if (atomic_read(&ch->ref.refcount) > 2) {
> /* Race with get_ref - do nothing */
> set_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &ch->flags);
> else
> mntput(....mnt);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&svc_XXX_mutex);
> }
>
>
> cache_put would have:
>
> if (test_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &h->flags) &&
> cd->cache_deactivate &&
> atomic_read(&h->ref.refcount <= 2))
> cd->cache_deactivate(cd, h);
>
> but there is still a race. If: (T1 and T2 are threads)
> T1: cache_put finds refcount is 2 and CACHE_ACTIVE is set and calls ->cache_deactiveate
> T2: cache_get increments the refcount to 3
> T1: cache_deactivate clears CACHE_ACTIVE and find refcount is 3
> T2: now calls cache_put, which sees CACHE_ACTIVE is clear so refcount becomes 2
> T1: sets CACHE_ACTIVE again and continues. refcount becomes 1.
>
> So not refcount is 1 and the item is still active.
>
> We can fix this by making cache_put loop:
> while (test_bit(CACHE_ACTIVE, &h->flags) &&
> cd->cache_deactivate &&
> (smb_rmb(), 1) &&
> atomic_read(&h->ref.refcount <= 2))
> cd->cache_deactivate(cd, h);
>
> This should ensure that refcount never gets to 1 with the
> item still active (i.e. with a ref count on the mnt).
>
>
> The work item and completion are a bit unfortunate too.
>
> I guess the problem here is that pin_kill() can run while there are
> some inactive references to the cache item. There can then be a race
> over who will use path_put_unpin to put the dentry.
>
> Could we fix that by having expXXX_pin_kill() use kref_get_unless_zero()
> on the cache item.
> If that succeeds, then path_put_unpin hasn't been called and it won't be.
> So expXXX_pin_kill can call it and then set CACHE_NEGATIVE.
> If it fails, then it has already been called and nothing else need be done.
> Almost.
> If kref_get_unless_zero() fails, pin_remove() may not have been called
> yet, but it will be soon. We might need to wait.
> It would be nice if pin_kill() would check ->done again after calling p->kill.
> e.g.
>
> diff --git a/fs/fs_pin.c b/fs/fs_pin.c
> index 611b5408f6ec..c2ef5c9d4c0d 100644
> --- a/fs/fs_pin.c
> +++ b/fs/fs_pin.c
> @@ -47,7 +47,9 @@ void pin_kill(struct fs_pin *p)
> spin_unlock_irq(&p->wait.lock);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> p->kill(p);
> - return;
> + if (p->done > 0)
> + return;
> + spin_lock_irq(&p->wait.lock);
> }
> if (p->done > 0) {
> spin_unlock_irq(&p->wait.lock);
>
> I think that would close the last gap, without needing extra work
> items and completion in the nfsd code.
>
> Al: would you be OK with that change to pin_kill?
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
--
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
