Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 14:41:37 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: scottl@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make udf(4) MPSAFE and use shared lookups Message-ID: <20081203124137.GE3045@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <200812021828.36857.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200811201627.58289.jhb@freebsd.org> <200811211452.02545.jhb@freebsd.org> <20081122115028.GB6408@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <200812021828.36857.jhb@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 06:28:36PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > On Saturday 22 November 2008 06:50:28 am Kostik Belousov wrote: > > udf_vget() does insmntque() before vnode is fully initialized, allowing > > other threads to find the vnode on the mount list. This is typical for > > !MPSAFE fs, and it seems corresponding call was not marked XXX for udf. > > It does the same as ufs. ufs only partially initializes the i-node (as much > as both cd9660 and udf do) and then exclusive locks the vnode before > insmntque(). They then finish initializing the i-node (bread() the d-node, > for example) and finally drop the vnode lock. My bad, unjustified grumbling. > > > udf_lookup for ISDOTDOT case unlocks dvp before vget'ing "..", allowing > > the same race on forced unmount as ufs (I will finally commit ufs patch > > today). The race happens for !MPSAFE code too, but it is easier to > > execute without Giant. > > Every fs is going to need this workaround it seems. Would be nice if there > was an easier way to avoid cut and pasting this code N times. Perhaps we > could make lookup() check VI_DOOMED instead? I had changed it do that at one > point, but then someone pointed me at the deadfs stuff and said that was > sufficient. The point of the patch is busying mp while parent vnode is locked, that guarantees that mp is not unmounted during whole DOTDOT traversing in vop_lookup(). The deadfs stuff works for lookup result vnode and is sufficient. The fragment that someone committed into UFS can be extracted into the vfs support routine. I doubt that it can be embedded into lookup(). The problem is that some filesystems do additional operations inside vop_lookup(). [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkk2foEACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4hA4QCfbOvumkkzfUeFlQNtEddszDdq rMwAnjCmPda6vAtxmlGFrclRn/KYE4DB =ikoi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081203124137.GE3045>