[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <153365630328.19074.5326096793225967868.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 18:38:23 +0300
From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
rafael@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
darrick.wong@...cle.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
hughd@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
ulf.hansson@...aro.org, aspriel@...il.com,
vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org, robin.murphy@....com, joe@...ches.com,
heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com, ktkhai@...tuozzo.com,
sfr@...b.auug.org.au, vdavydov.dev@...il.com, mhocko@...e.com,
chris@...is-wilson.co.uk, penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp,
aryabinin@...tuozzo.com, willy@...radead.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
shakeelb@...gle.com, jbacik@...com, mingo@...nel.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC 05/10] fs: Move list_lru_destroy() to
destroy_super_work()
The patch makes s_dentry_lru and s_inode_lru be destroyed
later from the workqueue. This is preparation to split
unregister_shrinker(super_block::s_shrink) in two stages,
and to call finalize stage from destroy_super_work().
Note, that generic filesystem shrinker unregistration
is safe to be splitted in two stages right after this
patch, since super_cache_count() and super_cache_scan()
have a deal with s_dentry_lru and s_inode_lru only.
But there are two exceptions: XFS and SHMEM, which
define .nr_cached_objects() and .free_cached_objects()
callbacks. These two do not allow us to do the splitting
right after this patch. They touch fs-specific data,
which is destroyed earlier, than destroy_super_work().
So, we can't call unregister_shrinker_delayed_finalize()
from destroy_super_work() because of them, and next
patches make preparations to make this possible.
Signed-off-by: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
---
fs/super.c | 17 +++++------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 426161360af3..457834278e37 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -159,6 +159,11 @@ static void destroy_super_work(struct work_struct *work)
destroy_work);
int i;
+ WARN_ON(list_lru_count(&s->s_dentry_lru));
+ WARN_ON(list_lru_count(&s->s_inode_lru));
+ list_lru_destroy(&s->s_dentry_lru);
+ list_lru_destroy(&s->s_inode_lru);
+
for (i = 0; i < SB_FREEZE_LEVELS; i++)
percpu_free_rwsem(&s->s_writers.rw_sem[i]);
kfree(s);
@@ -177,8 +182,6 @@ static void destroy_unused_super(struct super_block *s)
if (!s)
return;
up_write(&s->s_umount);
- list_lru_destroy(&s->s_dentry_lru);
- list_lru_destroy(&s->s_inode_lru);
security_sb_free(s);
put_user_ns(s->s_user_ns);
kfree(s->s_subtype);
@@ -283,8 +286,6 @@ static void __put_super(struct super_block *s)
{
if (!--s->s_count) {
list_del_init(&s->s_list);
- WARN_ON(s->s_dentry_lru.node);
- WARN_ON(s->s_inode_lru.node);
WARN_ON(!list_empty(&s->s_mounts));
security_sb_free(s);
put_user_ns(s->s_user_ns);
@@ -327,14 +328,6 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
unregister_shrinker(&s->s_shrink);
fs->kill_sb(s);
- /*
- * Since list_lru_destroy() may sleep, we cannot call it from
- * put_super(), where we hold the sb_lock. Therefore we destroy
- * the lru lists right now.
- */
- list_lru_destroy(&s->s_dentry_lru);
- list_lru_destroy(&s->s_inode_lru);
-
put_filesystem(fs);
put_super(s);
} else {
Powered by blists - more mailing lists