Re: [PATCH] xfs: use MMAPLOCK around filemap_map_pages()

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

 



> /me wonders if someone could please check all the *_ops that point to
> generic helpers to see if we're missing obvious things like lock
> taking.  Particularly someone who wants to learn about xfs' locking
> strategy; I promise it won't let out a ton of bees.
>

The list was compiled manually by auditing 'git grep '_operations.*=' fs/xfs'
structs for non xfs_/iomap_/noop_ functions.
I am not sure if all iomap_ functions are safe in that respect, but I suppose
those were done recently with sufficient xfs developers review...

fs/xfs/xfs_aops.c:const struct address_space_operations
xfs_address_space_operations = {
        .error_remove_page      = generic_error_remove_page,

generic_error_remove_page() calls truncate_inode_page() without MMAPLOCK
Is that safe? not sure

fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:static const struct vm_operations_struct xfs_file_vm_ops = {
        .map_pages      = filemap_map_pages,

Fixed by $SUBJECT

fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:const struct file_operations xfs_file_operations = {
        .splice_read    = generic_file_splice_read,

Will call xfs_file_read_iter, so looks fine

       .splice_write   = iter_file_splice_write,

Will call xfs_file_write_iter, so looks fine

       .get_unmapped_area = thp_get_unmapped_area,

Looks fine?

fs/xfs/xfs_file.c:const struct file_operations xfs_dir_file_operations = {
        .read           = generic_read_dir,
        .llseek         = generic_file_llseek,

No page cache, no dio, no worries?

Thanks,
Amir.



[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux