On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 01:51:07AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 02:47:21PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 1:58 PM, Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > That breaks d_invalidate(), unfortunately. Look at the termination
> > > conditions in the loop there...
> >
> > Ugh. I was going to say "but that doesn't even use select_collect()",
> > but yeah, detach_and_collect() calls it.
> >
> > It would be easy enough to just change the
> >
> > if (!list_empty(&data.select.dispose))
> >
> > there to
> >
> > if (!list_empty(&data.select.found))
> >
> > too.
>
> You would have to do the same in check_and_drop() as well,
> and that brings back d_invalidate()/d_invalidate() livelock
> we used to have. See 81be24d263db...
>
> I'm trying to put something together, but the damn thing is
> full of potential livelocks, unfortunately ;-/ Will send
> a followup once I have something resembling a sane solution...
I really wonder if we should just do the following in
d_invalidate():
* grab ->d_lock on victim, check if it's unhashed,
unlock and bugger off if it is. Otherwise, unhash and unlock.
>From that point on any d_set_mounted() in the subtree will
fail.
* shrink_dcache_parent() to reduce the subtree size.
* go through the (hopefully shrunk) subtree, picking
mountpoints. detach_mounts() for each of them.
* shrink_dcache_parent() if any points had been
encountered, to kick the now-unpinned stuff.
As a side benefit, we could probably be gentler on rename_lock
in d_set_mounted() after that change...
