lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -tip] remove the BKL: Replace BKL in mount/umount syscalls with a mutex
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 06:49:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> They dont really protect anything - the patch is wrong and
> equivalent to a plain removal of the BKL.
>
> The only case we found to ever matter in practice is NFS: it really
> wants to get rid of the BKL in nfsd_get_sb(). So pushing down the
> BKL lock into per filesystems and then removing it from NFS should
> do the trick.
>
> Would be nice to have some tentative Ack (or, a tentative
> non-immediate-NAK) from Al before we go touch a lot of filesystems
> though. Stupid dont-waste-human-effort considerations and stuff.
>
> For us, the much simpler solution would be to drop the BKL in
> nfsd_get_sb() and go on with life without to touch a dozen or so
> filesystems. Alessio, mind trying that too, is it a solution for
> your testcase?

What about trying to attack it piece-mail? ->unmount_begin is really
easy. The only one that doesn't protect everything properly is
9p, but it doesn't protect the state variable deep down a few levels
of function calls at all.

->remount_fs should be easy enough to, we do have proper per-sb
protection here, but do_remount_sb will need a bit of an audit.
(and of course pushing lock_kernel down into the many instances and
leave the cleanup-work to the fs maintainers).

The actual mount path is more interesting as there are quite a few cases
there. As a first step you can take lock_kernel from outside do_mount
into the various do_foo calls inside it, and then work on those piece
by piece.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-16 19:05    [W:0.806 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site