lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH V2 09/12] fs: Prevent mode change if file is mmap'ed
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 04:46:10PM -0800, Ira Weiny wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 02:22:12PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:29:39AM -0800, ira.weiny@intel.com wrote:
> > > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> > >
>
> [snip]
>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> > > index bc3654fe3b5d..1ab0906c6c7f 100644
> > > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> > > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c
> > > @@ -1200,6 +1200,14 @@ xfs_ioctl_setattr_dax_invalidate(
> > > goto out_unlock;
> > > }
> > >
> > > + /*
> > > + * If there is a mapping in place we must remain in our current mode.
> > > + */
> > > + if (atomic64_read(&inode->i_mapped)) {
> >
> > Urk, should we really be messing around with the address space
> > internals?
>
> I contemplated a function call instead of checking i_mapped directly? Is that
> what you mean?

Yeah. Abstracting the details just enough that filesystems don't have
to know that i_mapped is atomic64 etc.

>
> >
> > > + error = -EBUSY;
> > > + goto out_unlock;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > error = filemap_write_and_wait(inode->i_mapping);
> > > if (error)
> > > goto out_unlock;
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
> > > index 631f11d6246e..6e7dc626b657 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> > > @@ -740,6 +740,7 @@ struct inode {
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > void *i_private; /* fs or device private pointer */
> > > + atomic64_t i_mapped;
> >
> > I would have expected to find this in struct address_space since the
> > mapping count is a function of the address space, right?
>
> I suppose but the only external call (above) would be passing an inode. So to
> me it seemed better here.

But the number of memory mappings reflects the state of the address
space, not the inode. Or maybe put another way, if I were an mm
developer I would not expect to look in struct inode for mm state.

static inline bool inode_has_mappings(struct inode *inode)
{
return atomic64_read(&inode->i_mapping->mapcount) > 0;
}

OTOH if there exist other mm developers who /do/ find that storing the
mmap count in struct inode is more logical, please let me know. :)

--D

> Ira
>
> >
> > --D
> >

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-14 02:31    [W:0.098 / U:5.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site