On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 11:40:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:18:43PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> > > There's more of the "delete from shrink list not owned by us" in select
> > > parent.
> > > Proposed patch appended.
> >
> > Ahh. Clearly this needs more work before I pull.
>
> *nod*
>
> Besides, I want to put Miklos' "don't bother with RCU in shrink_dentry_list()"
> in there as soon as select_collect() has been dealt with. I don't think
> that the currently posted patch for select_collect() is right, though -
> see my reply to parent posting. Basically, I think we should treat "it's
> on the shrink list already" as "increment data->found and keep going". IOW,
> if (on shrink list) {
> data->found++;
> } else {
> if (on lru list)
> d_lru_del
> if (refcount is zero) {
> d_shrink_add
> data->found++;
> }
> }
> if (data->found)
> ret = need_resched() ? D_WALK_QUIT : D_WALK_NORETRY;
While we are at it - BUG() in umount_collect() is probably a bad idea.
At that point we are holding ->s_umount, so it guarantees that a lot
of stuff from that point on will get stuck. Starting with sync(2).
And I really doubt that damage from WARN() instead will be more...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
