All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: free btrfs_device in place
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 19:54:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171011175404.GZ3521@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171010215103.20828-2-bo.li.liu@oracle.com>

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 03:51:03PM -0600, Liu Bo wrote:
> It's pointless to defer it to a kthread helper as we're not under any
> special context.

I agree the doubly deferred freeing is pointless. It's a weird mix of
RCU and workques and understanding all the interactions turned out to be
hard, last time I tried.

The RCU stuff needs the rcu_barriers, and the callback can be served
from any process context. While the workqueus have their dedicated
kthreads.

Calling free_device() is quick, it just adds the work to the queue and
returns. This makes __btrfs_close_devices/btrfs_rm_device/... and all
other callers fast, at the cost that there must be some explicit barrier
or waiting done when we want to make sure all the device resources have
been freed.

I can't say the quick return is wrong, but it makes the device lifetime
hard to understand. The device freeing callback (__free_device) is
lightweight, but also calls "rcu_free" for the device name.

I have WIP patches to clean up the rcu and locking around devices and
actually document the rules, but with unreviewed pile in the mailinglist
I can't tell when this is going to land. If you want to simplify at
least the device freeing, please go on, and explain in the changelog
that it's not going to break anything. The hand-wavy sentence is not
what I'd expect :)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-10-11 17:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-10 21:51 [PATCH] Btrfs: free btrfs_device in place Liu Bo
2017-10-11  6:56 ` Anand Jain
2017-10-11 17:54 ` David Sterba [this message]
2017-10-11 17:21   ` Liu Bo
2017-10-11 18:13 ` [PATCH v2] " Liu Bo
2017-10-20 17:52   ` David Sterba
2017-10-24  5:02 ` [PATCH v3] " Liu Bo
2017-10-25 13:13   ` David Sterba

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=20171011175404.GZ3521@twin.jikos.cz \
    --to=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 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.