All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
@ 2013-07-27 10:12 Azat Khuzhin
  2013-07-29  7:48 ` Azat Khuzhin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Azat Khuzhin @ 2013-07-27 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: chris.mason, Azat Khuzhin, open list

Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
__btrfs_close_devices()

There is another place that delete items lock_stripe_add(), but there we
don't need safe version, because after deleting we exit from loop.

Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
 
 static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
 {
-	struct btrfs_device *device;
+	struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
 
 	if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
 		return 0;
 
 	mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
-	list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
 		struct btrfs_device *new_device;
 		struct rcu_string *name;
 
-- 
1.7.10.4


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
  2013-07-27 10:12 [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items Azat Khuzhin
@ 2013-07-29  7:48 ` Azat Khuzhin
  2013-07-30  3:40   ` Miao Xie
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Azat Khuzhin @ 2013-07-29  7:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: chris.mason, Azat Khuzhin, open list

On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com> wrote:
> Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
> __btrfs_close_devices()
>
> There is another place that delete items lock_stripe_add(), but there we
> don't need safe version, because after deleting we exit from loop.
>
> Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
> @@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
>
>  static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
>  {
> -       struct btrfs_device *device;
> +       struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
>
>         if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
>                 return 0;
>
>         mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
> -       list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
> +       list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
>                 struct btrfs_device *new_device;
>                 struct rcu_string *name;

There is "kfree(device);" at the end of loop, maybe there must "goto
again;" after it?
(instead of this patch)

>
> --
> 1.7.10.4
>



-- 
Respectfully
Azat Khuzhin

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
  2013-07-29  7:48 ` Azat Khuzhin
@ 2013-07-30  3:40   ` Miao Xie
  2013-08-31  6:11     ` Azat Khuzhin
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Miao Xie @ 2013-07-30  3:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Azat Khuzhin; +Cc: linux-btrfs, chris.mason, open list

On mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:48:32 +0400, Azat Khuzhin wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
>> __btrfs_close_devices()
>>
>> There is another place that delete items lock_stripe_add(), but there we
>> don't need safe version, because after deleting we exit from loop.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>> @@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
>>
>>  static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
>>  {
>> -       struct btrfs_device *device;
>> +       struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
>>
>>         if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
>>                 return 0;
>>
>>         mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
>> -       list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
>> +       list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
>>                 struct btrfs_device *new_device;
>>                 struct rcu_string *name;
> 
> There is "kfree(device);" at the end of loop, maybe there must "goto
> again;" after it?
> (instead of this patch)

Your fix is right, we needn't search from the head once again.

The other fix way is:
	call_rcu(&device->rcu, free_device);
+	device = new_device;
 }
but from the viewpoint of the readability, this way is not so good.

Reviewed-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>

> 
>>
>> --
>> 1.7.10.4
>>
> 
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
  2013-07-30  3:40   ` Miao Xie
@ 2013-08-31  6:11     ` Azat Khuzhin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Azat Khuzhin @ 2013-08-31  6:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: miaox; +Cc: linux-btrfs, chris.mason, open list

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> On mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:48:32 +0400, Azat Khuzhin wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
>>> __btrfs_close_devices()
>>>
>>> There is another place that delete items lock_stripe_add(), but there we
>>> don't need safe version, because after deleting we exit from loop.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>>> index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
>>> --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>>> +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
>>> @@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
>>>
>>>  static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
>>>  {
>>> -       struct btrfs_device *device;
>>> +       struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
>>>
>>>         if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
>>>                 return 0;
>>>
>>>         mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
>>> -       list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
>>> +       list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
>>>                 struct btrfs_device *new_device;
>>>                 struct rcu_string *name;
>>
>> There is "kfree(device);" at the end of loop, maybe there must "goto
>> again;" after it?
>> (instead of this patch)

Ugh. I was looking into another function!

>
> Your fix is right, we needn't search from the head once again.
>
> The other fix way is:
>         call_rcu(&device->rcu, free_device);
> +       device = new_device;
>  }
> but from the viewpoint of the readability, this way is not so good.
>
> Reviewed-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>

Thanks!
Miao, should I resend patch with you reviewed-by?

>
>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1.7.10.4
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Respectfully
Azat Khuzhin

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
@ 2013-09-01 10:19 Azat Khuzhin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Azat Khuzhin @ 2013-09-01 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: jbacik, miaox, Azat Khuzhin, Chris Mason, open list

Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in
__btrfs_close_devices()

list_for_each_entry() {
        list_replace_rcu();
        call_rcu();             <--    We may free the device, if we get next
                                       device by the current one, the page fault
                                       may happen.
}

Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Miao Xie <miaox@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
V2: Add some comments from Miao into commit message

 fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
 
 static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
 {
-	struct btrfs_device *device;
+	struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
 
 	if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
 		return 0;
 
 	mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
-	list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
 		struct btrfs_device *new_device;
 		struct rcu_string *name;
 
-- 
1.7.10.4


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items
@ 2013-07-27  5:15 Azat Khuzhin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Azat Khuzhin @ 2013-07-27  5:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs; +Cc: chris.mason, Azat Khuzhin, open list

Replace list_for_each_entry() by list_for_each_entry_safe() in next
functions:
- lock_stripe_add()
- __btrfs_close_devices()

Signed-off-by: Azat Khuzhin <a3at.mail@gmail.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/raid56.c  |    4 ++--
 fs/btrfs/volumes.c |    4 ++--
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
index 0525e13..37e6dc9 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/raid56.c
@@ -636,7 +636,7 @@ static noinline int lock_stripe_add(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio)
 {
 	int bucket = rbio_bucket(rbio);
 	struct btrfs_stripe_hash *h = rbio->fs_info->stripe_hash_table->table + bucket;
-	struct btrfs_raid_bio *cur;
+	struct btrfs_raid_bio *cur, *next;
 	struct btrfs_raid_bio *pending;
 	unsigned long flags;
 	DEFINE_WAIT(wait);
@@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ static noinline int lock_stripe_add(struct btrfs_raid_bio *rbio)
 	int walk = 0;
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&h->lock, flags);
-	list_for_each_entry(cur, &h->hash_list, hash_list) {
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(cur, next, &h->hash_list, hash_list) {
 		walk++;
 		if (cur->raid_map[0] == rbio->raid_map[0]) {
 			spin_lock(&cur->bio_list_lock);
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 78b8717..1d1b595 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -616,13 +616,13 @@ static void free_device(struct rcu_head *head)
 
 static int __btrfs_close_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices)
 {
-	struct btrfs_device *device;
+	struct btrfs_device *device, *next;
 
 	if (--fs_devices->opened > 0)
 		return 0;
 
 	mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
-	list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(device, next, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
 		struct btrfs_device *new_device;
 		struct rcu_string *name;
 
-- 
1.7.10.4


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2013-09-01 10:20 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-07-27 10:12 [PATCH] btrfs: use list_for_each_entry_safe() when delete items Azat Khuzhin
2013-07-29  7:48 ` Azat Khuzhin
2013-07-30  3:40   ` Miao Xie
2013-08-31  6:11     ` Azat Khuzhin
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-09-01 10:19 Azat Khuzhin
2013-07-27  5:15 Azat Khuzhin

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.