[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150831124442.GB31015@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 14:44:42 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] task_work: remove fifo ordering guarantee
On 08/29, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 7:11 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > If this needs to be kept, maybe then add following, to make sure
> > we flush the list at most every BITS_PER_LONG files
>
> Hmm.
>
> I'm wondering if we should just make close_files() (or maybe even
> filp_close()) use a synchronous fput().
Heh. I thought about the same change. So perhaps it is even the right
thing to do. Still I am worried, because "it can't be that simple" ;)
And, with this change close_files() is called before exit_fs() and
exit_task_namespaces(). This is fine (iiuc), but this means that the
creative code in drivers/ can (wrongly) rely on this fact again. IIRC,
the change which moved __fput() into task_work_exit() uncovered some
interesting problems, like filp_open() called from fop->release().
Anyway, this is the question to Al, I guess.
Oleg.
--
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