From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs: fix bdi_unregister() before sb kill
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:02:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090918150248.GB23126@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090918064006.GU23126@kernel.dk>
On Fri, Sep 18 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17 2009, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-09-17 at 21:40 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 17 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > This can cause a hang on NFS umount, since the bdi gets pruned before we
> > > > flush any pending dirty IO. Peter, can you check whether it fixes your
> > > > issue?
> > >
> > > There's another problem with NFS && backing devices. NFS may call
> > > bdi_destroy() on a bdi without ever called bdi_init(). This was always a
> > > bad idea, now it's an issue.
> > >
> > > So, Trond, can I safely add a server->flags private flag to indicate
> > > that we have called bdi_init()? Then nfs_free_server() knows when to
> > > call bdi_destroy(). Seems like the safest fix, since error handling is
> > > currently 'just call nfs_free_server()'.
> >
> > Urgh... Is there any reason why we can't just move the call to
> > bdi_init() into nfs_bdi_register()? It seems bizarre to have to
> > initialise the backing_dev_info twice like this...
>
> No reason at all, I don't know why it was implemented that way
> originally.
>
> > If we do that, then we can just look at the BDI_registered state flag in
> > order to figure out if we need to call bdi_unregister()
>
> That's not exactly pretty either, diving into internal bdi details to
> find out if we did an init/register of the device. BDI_registered is
> just a debug flag, it may even go away again shortly.
Trond, we need to make some sort of decision on this very shortly. It
definitely needs to be fixed for -rc1, it's causing NFS oopses. So lets
make some sort of call on this and get it added, then you/we/I can
always pretty it up later.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-18 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-17 12:42 Jens Axboe
2009-09-17 19:40 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-17 19:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-17 19:48 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-17 23:16 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-09-18 6:40 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 15:02 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2009-09-18 16:19 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-09-18 17:36 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 18:32 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 18:40 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-09-18 18:46 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 20:01 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 20:05 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 20:11 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-09-18 20:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-18 20:22 ` Jens Axboe
2009-09-18 20:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-18 20:44 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090918150248.GB23126@kernel.dk \
--to=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome