linux-kernel - Re: [Linux-cachefs] [PATCH v5 03/22] cachefiles: introduce on-demand read mode

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <YjiJtrOEBa7p/8M2@B-P7TQMD6M-0146.local>
Date:   Mon, 21 Mar 2022 22:20:38 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, chao@...nel.org,
        tao.peng@...ux.alibaba.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
        bo.liu@...ux.alibaba.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        luodaowen.backend@...edance.com, xiang@...nel.org,
        gerry@...ux.alibaba.com, linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        eguan@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [Linux-cachefs] [PATCH v5 03/22] cachefiles: introduce on-demand
 read mode

On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 02:14:03PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> > Why do you have a separate rwlock when the xarray already has its own
> > spinlock?  This is usually a really bad idea.
> 
> Jeffle wants to hold a lock across the CACHEFILES_DEAD check and the xarray
> access.
> 
> However, he tells xarray to do a GFP_KERNEL alloc whilst holding the rwlock:-/

Yeah, sorry, there are trivial mistakes due to sleep in atomic
contexts (sorry that I didn't catch them earlier..)

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> David
> --
> Linux-cachefs mailing list
> Linux-cachefs@...hat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cachefs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives