[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170919155547.GA40124@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:55:47 -0700
From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: introduce UMOUNT_WAIT which waits for umount
completion
On 09/16, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 04:29:11PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>
> > The mntput() in delayed_fput() is the last function call. So before that moment,
> > sys_umount() may see mnt_get_count() as 2, so it avoids EBUSY condition. I'm not
> > sure why it check over 2 tho.
>
> Because it has just grabbed a reference itself, in addition to the one that keeps
> the damn thing alive (due to being mounted). So it bloody well should have
> triggered -EBUSY, if they refer to the same vfsmount.
I've tracked another view in terms of mnt_get_count() and sb->s_active based on
namespaces, and could get the below scenario for instance.
Term: namespace(mnt_get_count())
1. create_new_namespaces() creates ns1 and ns2,
/data(1) ns1(1) ns2(1)
| | |
---------------------
|
sb->s_active = 3
2. after binder_proc_clear_zombies() for ns2 and ns1 triggers
- delayed_fput()
- delayed_mntput_work(ns2)
/data(1) ns1(1)
| |
----------
|
sb->s_active = 2
3. umount() for /data is successed.
ns1(1)
|
sb->s_active = 1
4. device_shutdown() by init
5. - delayed_mntput_work(ns1)
- put_super(), since sb->s_active = 0
- -EIO
Please let me know, if I'm missing something.
Thanks,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists