From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Andrey Wagin <avagin@gmail.com>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] move exit_task_namespaces() outside of exit_notify()
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:33:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130415153307.GA15817@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANaxB-wb3h9zb1C38W=pSjg_sf4RiRbpUHRU2pKppohmDy5Dtg@mail.gmail.com>
On 04/15, Andrey Wagin wrote:
>
> It looks good for me. I have tested it a bit and don't find any problem.
> Oleg, thank you.
>
> Acked-by: Andrew Vagin <avagin@gmail.com>
Thanks Andrey and Eric.
> > --- x/kernel/exit.c
> > +++ x/kernel/exit.c
> > @@ -649,7 +649,6 @@ static void exit_notify(struct task_stru
> > * jobs, send them a SIGHUP and then a SIGCONT. (POSIX 3.2.2.2)
> > */
> > forget_original_parent(tsk);
> > - exit_task_namespaces(tsk);
> >
> > write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
> > if (group_dead)
> > @@ -795,6 +794,7 @@ void do_exit(long code)
> > exit_shm(tsk);
> > exit_files(tsk);
> > exit_fs(tsk);
> > + exit_task_namespaces(tsk);
> > exit_task_work(tsk);
I do not see any problems with this patch too... but still I am worried.
Even if fput() can work correctly after exit_task_namespaces(), this limits
the usage of task_work_add(). Probably this is fine, but can't we at least
discuss another change?
We can change fput() so that it can always work, even after exit_task_work(),
void fput(struct file *file)
{
if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count)) {
struct task_struct *task = current;
unsigned long flags;
file_sb_list_del(file);
if (likely(!in_interrupt() && !(task->flags & PF_KTHREAD))) {
init_task_work(&file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, ____fput);
if (!task_work_add(task, &file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, true))
return;
}
spin_lock_irqsave(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
list_add(&file->f_u.fu_list, &delayed_fput_list);
schedule_work(&delayed_fput_work);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
}
}
Al, what do you think?
Untested patch below.
Oleg.
--- x/fs/file_table.c
+++ x/fs/file_table.c
@@ -306,17 +306,19 @@ void fput(struct file *file)
{
if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count)) {
struct task_struct *task = current;
+ unsigned long flags;
+
file_sb_list_del(file);
- if (unlikely(in_interrupt() || task->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) {
- unsigned long flags;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
- list_add(&file->f_u.fu_list, &delayed_fput_list);
- schedule_work(&delayed_fput_work);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
- return;
+ if (likely(!in_interrupt() && !(task->flags & PF_KTHREAD))) {
+ init_task_work(&file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, ____fput);
+ if (!task_work_add(task, &file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, true))
+ return;
}
- init_task_work(&file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, ____fput);
- task_work_add(task, &file->f_u.fu_rcuhead, true);
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
+ list_add(&file->f_u.fu_list, &delayed_fput_list);
+ schedule_work(&delayed_fput_work);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&delayed_fput_lock, flags);
}
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-15 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-12 19:27 [PATCH] kernel: move exit_task_work() past exit_notify() Andrey Vagin
2013-04-13 14:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-04-13 15:54 ` [PATCH 0/1] (Was: kernel: move exit_task_work() past exit_notify()) Oleg Nesterov
2013-04-13 15:55 ` [PATCH 1/1] move exit_task_namespaces() outside of exit_notify() Oleg Nesterov
2013-04-14 1:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-04-15 9:57 ` Andrey Wagin
2013-04-15 15:33 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2013-06-13 9:24 ` Andrew Vagin
2013-06-14 13:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20130415153307.GA15817@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avagin@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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