Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Mar 2006 08:35:00 +0530 | From | Balbir Singh <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Busy inodes after unmount, be more verbose in generic_shutdown_super |
| |
> I think that in most cases, the race doesn't matter if > shrink_dcache_memory misses a dentry because someone else is holding a > temporary reference, it really doesn't matter. > Similarly most callers of shrink_dcache_parent are happy with a > best-effort.
I agree.
> > I should have been more explicit that the patch was against > 2.6.16-rc5-mm2. This contains some dcache patches to allow nfs > filesystem to share superblocks, and one of the patches replaces the > calls to shrink_dcache_parent and shrink_dcache_anon with a single > call to a new function: shrink_dcache_sb. >
shrink_dcache_parent() has been added back to generic_shutdown_super in -mm3 (just checked). With that being the case, I have only one concern with your patch
wait_on_prunes() breaks out if sb->prunes == 0. What if shrink_dcache_parent() now calls select_parent(). select_parent() could still find entries with d_count > 0 and skip them and shrink_dcache_memory() can still cause the race condition to occur.
I think pushing wait_on_prunes() to after shrink_dcache_parent() will most likely solve the race.
> Thanks for the feedback
Your welcome!
> > NeilBrown
Balbir
-- I'm extremely grateful that hundreds of you have taken time to read these patches, and to detect and report errors that you've found. Your comments have helped me improve enormously. But I must confess that I'm also disappointed to have had absolutely no feedback so far on several of the patches on which I worked hardest when I was preparing these patches. Could it be that (1) you've said nothing about them because I somehow managed to get the details perfect? Or is it that (2) you shy away and are busy, hence you are unable to spend more than a few minutes on any particular topic? Although I do like to think that readers like to provide feedback, I fear that hypothesis (1) is far less likely than hypothesis (2).
Adapted from Don Knuth's comments on feedback for his exercises
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |