lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/11] fs: add iterate_supers_excl() and iterate_supers_reverse_excl()
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
> There are use cases where we wish to traverse the superblock list
> but also capture errors, and in which case we want to avoid having
> our callers issue a lock themselves since we can do the locking for
> the callers. Provide a iterate_supers_excl() which calls a function
> with the write lock held. If an error occurs we capture it and
> propagate it.
>
> Likewise there are use cases where we wish to traverse the superblock
> list but in reverse order. The new iterate_supers_reverse_excl() helpers
> does this but also also captures any errors encountered.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/super.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/fs.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
> index a63513d187e8..885711c1d35b 100644
> --- a/fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/super.c
> @@ -605,6 +605,97 @@ void iterate_supers(void (*f)(struct super_block *, void *), void *arg)
> spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * iterate_supers_excl - exclusively call func for all active superblocks
> + * @f: function to call
> + * @arg: argument to pass to it
> + *
> + * Scans the superblock list and calls given function, passing it
> + * locked superblock and given argument. Returns 0 unless an error
> + * occurred on calling the function on any superblock.
> + */
> +int iterate_supers_excl(int (*f)(struct super_block *, void *), void *arg)
> +{
> + struct super_block *sb, *p = NULL;
> + int error = 0;
> +
> + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(sb, &super_blocks, s_list) {
> + if (hlist_unhashed(&sb->s_instances))
> + continue;
> + sb->s_count++;
> + spin_unlock(&sb_lock);

Can anything bad happen if the list is modified at this point by a
concurrent thread?

> +
> + down_write(&sb->s_umount);
> + if (sb->s_root && (sb->s_flags & SB_BORN)) {
> + error = f(sb, arg);
> + if (error) {
> + up_write(&sb->s_umount);
> + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> + __put_super(sb);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + up_write(&sb->s_umount);
> +
> + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> + if (p)
> + __put_super(p);
> + p = sb;
> + }
> + if (p)
> + __put_super(p);
> + spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> +
> + return error;
> +}
> +

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-30 00:48    [W:0.635 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site