[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <17753.19260.9836.716649@cse.unsw.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 15:51:08 +1100
From: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
To: Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>
Cc: devel@...nvz.org, Vasily Averin <vvs@...ru>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Olaf Hering <olh@...e.de>,
Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.19-rc3] VFS: per-sb dentry lru list
On Wednesday November 1, dev@...ru wrote:
> <<<< AFAICS, doing so you introduced a leak of anonymous dentries.
>
> d_alloc_anon() calls d_alloc() with parent == NULL, i.e. dentries have no parent
> and are not linked to the sb->s_root...
Yep, thanks.
> BTW, looking at it, I found that s_anon field on super block is not
> used any more.
I don't know what you mean by that. It is still used...
> we can add BUG_ON(!hlist_empty(&sb->s_anon)) in generic_shutdown_super to avoid such issues like this.
>
> maybe we can fix it adding something like:
> while (!list_empty(&sb->s_anon)))
> prune_dcache(MAX_INT, &sb->s_anon);
It seems that anon dentries can now have children (I think someone
explained that too me - shrink_dcache_for_umount certainly suggests
it).
Also, in this context we cannot be sure that all dentries can be
freed. This is being called a remount time remember, and some stuff
might still be in use.
We probably need to move the s_anon list to a temporary list and
repeatedly:
move the top entry back to s_anon and call shrink_dcache_parent
on it.
Needs more thought.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists