lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH 2/8] revoke: inode revoke lock V7
Quoting Pekka J Enberg (penberg@cs.helsinki.fi):
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > I assume you mean S_REVOKE_LOCK and not ->i_mutex, right?
> >
> > No I did mean the i_mutex since you take the i_mutex when you set
> > S_REVOKE_LOCK. So between that and the comment above do_lookup(),
> > I assumed you were trying to lock out concurrent do_lookups() returning
> > an inode whose revoke is starting at the same time.
>
> No, I only use ->i_mutex for synchronizing the write to ->i_flags.

duh.

> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > The caller is supposed to block open(2) with chmod(2)/chattr(2) so while
> > > revoke is in progress, you can get references to the _revoked inode_,
> > > which is fine (operations on it will fail with EBADFS). The
> > > ->i_revoke_wait bits are there to make sure that while we revoke, you
> > > can't get a _new reference_ to the inode until we're done.
> >
> > And a new reference means through iget(), so if revoke starts
> > between the IS_REVOKE_LOCKED() check in do_lookup and its return,
> > it's ok bc we'll get a reference later on?
>
> Yes, as soon as we unhash the dentries and the inode, do_lookup() will try
> to find a new inode with iget() but we need to wait before writeback on
> the revoked inode is finished.

Ok, that makes sense. I'll let that sit for a short while and look
again :)

thanks,
-serge

> On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > I'm a little confused but i'll keep looking.
>
> I don't blame you. The patch is missing the following "minor detail" which
> is needed to avoid fs corruption...
>
> Pekka
>
> Index: 2.6/fs/revoke.c
> ===================================================================
> --- 2.6.orig/fs/revoke.c 2007-12-16 19:57:40.000000000 +0200
> +++ 2.6/fs/revoke.c 2007-12-19 18:03:13.000000000 +0200
> @@ -426,6 +426,8 @@ int err = 0;
> make_revoked_inode(inode);
> remove_inode_hash(inode);
> revoke_aliases(inode);
> +
> + err = write_inode_now(inode, 1);
> failed:
> revoke_unlock(inode);
> wake_up(&inode->i_revoke_wait);


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-19 21:33    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site