From: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@redhat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] ipc,fs: use rcu_work to free struct ipc_namespace
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 11:54:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <76ab6eb2c848f6b33fe3cc910d754599e6b2d213.camel@surriel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87iltcf996.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1664 bytes --]
On Fri, 2022-02-18 at 10:08 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Maybe I am reading the lifetimes wrong but is there
> any chance the code can just do something like the diff below?
>
> AKA have a special version of kern_umount that does the call_rcu?
>
> Looking at rcu_reclaim_tiny I think this use of mnt_rcu is valid.
> AKA reusing the rcu_head in the rcu callback.
>
>
> diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> index 40b994a29e90..7d7aaef1592e 100644
> --- a/fs/namespace.c
> +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> @@ -4395,6 +4395,22 @@ void kern_unmount(struct vfsmount *mnt)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(kern_unmount);
>
> +static void rcu_mntput(struct rcu_head *head)
> +{
> + struct mount *mnt = container_of(head, struct mount,
> mnt_rcu);
> + mntput(&mnt->mnt);
> +}
> +
> +void kern_rcu_unmount(struct vfsmount *mnt)
> +{
> + /* release long term mount so mount point can be released */
> + if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mnt)) {
> + struct mount *m = real_mount(mnt);
> + m->mnt_ns = NULL;
> + call_rcu(&m->mnt_rcu, rcu_mntput);
> + }
> +}
OK, two comments here:
1) As Paul pointed out, we need to use call_rcu_work here,
because rcu_mntput needs to run from a work item (or well,
any process context) because of the rwlock.
2) No user of kern_unmount can use the vfsmount structure
after kern_unmount returns. That means they could all use
the RCU version, and no special version is needed.
Let me go test a patch that does that...
--
All Rights Reversed.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-18 16:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-17 20:36 Rik van Riel
2022-02-17 21:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-02-18 3:29 ` Al Viro
2022-02-18 5:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-02-18 13:01 ` Christian Brauner
2022-02-18 16:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2022-02-18 16:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-02-18 16:54 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
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=76ab6eb2c848f6b33fe3cc910d754599e6b2d213.camel@surriel.com \
--to=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gscrivan@redhat.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®