From: Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, tkhai@ya.ru, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
vbabka@suse.cz, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org,
djwong@kernel.org, hughd@google.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
muchun.song@linux.dev
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/8] fs: move list_lru_destroy() to destroy_super_work()
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 09:57:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230531095742.2480623-4-qi.zheng@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230531095742.2480623-1-qi.zheng@linux.dev>
From: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@ya.ru>
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 split 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 <tkhai@ya.ru>
Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
---
fs/super.c | 17 +++++------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 8d8d68799b34..2ce4c72720f3 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);
@@ -287,8 +290,6 @@ 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);
@@ -330,14 +331,6 @@ 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 {
--
2.30.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-31 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-31 9:57 [PATCH 0/8] make unregistration of super_block shrinker more faster Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 1/8] mm: vmscan: move shrinker_debugfs_remove() before synchronize_srcu() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 10:49 ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-31 12:52 ` Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 2/8] mm: vmscan: split unregister_shrinker() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` Qi Zheng [this message]
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 4/8] fs: shrink only (SB_ACTIVE|SB_BORN) superblocks in super_cache_scan() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 5/8] fs: introduce struct super_operations::destroy_super() callback Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 11:19 ` Christian Brauner
2023-05-31 12:54 ` Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 6/8] xfs: introduce xfs_fs_destroy_super() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 7/8] shmem: implement shmem_destroy_super() Qi Zheng
2023-05-31 9:57 ` [PATCH 8/8] fs: use unregister_shrinker_delayed_{initiate, finalize} for super_block shrinker Qi Zheng
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230531095742.2480623-4-qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--to=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=tkhai@ya.ru \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).