From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, bart.vanassche@wdc.com,
ming.lei@redhat.com, tytso@mit.edu, darrick.wong@oracle.com,
jikos@kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, pavel@ucw.cz,
len.brown@intel.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com, jgross@suse.com,
todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com, nborisov@suse.com, jack@suse.cz,
martin.petersen@oracle.com, ONeukum@suse.com,
oleksandr@natalenko.name, oleg.b.antonyan@gmail.com,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] fs: freeze on suspend and thaw on resume
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 07:58:41 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171003205841.GN3666@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171003185313.1017-3-mcgrof@kernel.org>
On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 11:53:10AM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> This uses the existing filesystem freeze and thaw callbacks to
> freeze each filesystem on suspend/hibernation and thaw upon resume.
>
> This is needed so that we properly really stop IO in flight without
> races after userspace has been frozen. Without this we rely on
> kthread freezing and its semantics are loose and error prone.
> For instance, even though a kthread may use try_to_freeze() and end
> up being frozen we have no way of being sure that everything that
> has been spawned asynchronously from it (such as timers) have also
> been stopped as well.
>
> A long term advantage of also adding filesystem freeze / thawing
> supporting durign suspend / hibernation is that long term we may
> be able to eventually drop the kernel's thread freezing completely
> as it was originally added to stop disk IO in flight as we hibernate
> or suspend.
>
> This also implies that many kthread users exist which have been
> adding freezer semantics onto its kthreads without need. These also
> will need to be reviewed later.
>
> This is based on prior work originally by Rafael Wysocki and later by
> Jiri Kosina.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/super.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/fs.h | 13 +++++++++
> kernel/power/process.c | 14 ++++++++-
> 3 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
> index d45e92d9a38f..ce8da8b187b1 100644
> --- a/fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/super.c
> @@ -1572,3 +1572,82 @@ int thaw_super(struct super_block *sb)
> return 0;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(thaw_super);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> +static bool super_allows_freeze(struct super_block *sb)
> +{
> + return !!(sb->s_type->fs_flags & FS_FREEZE_ON_SUSPEND);
> +}
That's a completely misleading function name. All superblocks can be
frozen - freeze_super() is filesystem independent. And given that, I
don't see why these super_should_freeze() hoops need to be jumped
through...
> +
> +static bool super_should_freeze(struct super_block *sb)
> +{
> + if (!sb->s_root)
> + return false;
> + if (!(sb->s_flags & MS_BORN))
> + return false;
> + /*
> + * We don't freeze virtual filesystems, we skip those filesystems with
> + * no backing device.
> + */
> + if (sb->s_bdi == &noop_backing_dev_info)
> + return false;
> + /* No need to freeze read-only filesystems */
> + if (sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY)
> + return false;
> + if (!super_allows_freeze(sb))
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +int fs_suspend_freeze_sb(struct super_block *sb, void *priv)
> +{
> + int error = 0;
> +
> + spin_lock(&sb_lock);
> + if (!super_should_freeze(sb))
> + goto out;
> +
> + up_read(&sb->s_umount);
> + pr_info("%s (%s): freezing\n", sb->s_type->name, sb->s_id);
> + error = freeze_super(sb);
> + down_read(&sb->s_umount);
> +out:
> + if (error && error != -EBUSY)
> + pr_notice("%s (%s): Unable to freeze, error=%d",
> + sb->s_type->name, sb->s_id, error);
> + spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
> + return error;
> +}
I don't think this was ever tested. Calling freeze_super() with a
spinlock held with through "sleeping in atomic" errors all over the
place.
Also, the s_umount lock juggling is nasty. Your new copy+pasted
iterate_supers_reverse() takes the lock in read mode, yet all the
freeze/thaw callers here want to take it in write mode. So, really,
iterate_supers_reverse() needs to be iterate_supers_reverse_excl()
and take the write lock, and freeze_super/thaw_super need to be
factored into locked and unlocked versions.
In which case, we end up with:
int fs_suspend_freeze_sb(struct super_block *sb, void *priv)
{
return freeze_locked_super(sb);
}
int fs_suspend_thaw_sb(struct super_block *sb, void *priv)
{
return thaw_locked_super(sb);
}
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-03 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-03 18:53 [RFC 0/5] fs: replace kthread freezing with filesystem freeze/thaw Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 18:53 ` [RFC 1/5] fs: add iterate_supers_reverse() Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 18:53 ` [RFC 2/5] fs: freeze on suspend and thaw on resume Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:02 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-03 20:23 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:32 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-03 20:39 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:06 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 20:58 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2017-10-03 21:16 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 18:53 ` [RFC 3/5] xfs: allow fs freeze on suspend/hibernation Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 18:53 ` [RFC 4/5] ext4: add fs freezing support " Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 19:59 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-10-03 20:13 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-04 1:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-10-04 7:05 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-04 15:25 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-04 16:48 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-10-04 22:22 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-03 18:53 ` [RFC 5/5] pm: remove kernel thread freezing Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 18:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-03 21:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-04 0:47 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-04 1:03 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-11-29 23:05 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-04 7:18 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-03 20:12 ` Pavel Machek
2017-10-03 20:15 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 20:21 ` Pavel Machek
2017-10-03 20:38 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 20:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-10-03 20:57 ` Pavel Machek
2017-10-03 21:00 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 21:09 ` Shuah Khan
2017-10-03 21:18 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:49 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-06 12:07 ` Pavel Machek
2017-10-06 12:54 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-10-03 20:13 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-03 20:17 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 20:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-03 20:24 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 20:27 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:51 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-10-03 21:04 ` Dave Chinner
2017-10-03 21:07 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-04 6:07 ` Hannes Reinecke
2017-10-03 19:33 ` [RFC 0/5] fs: replace kthread freezing with filesystem freeze/thaw Ming Lei
2017-10-03 20:05 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-10-03 20:54 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-10-03 20:59 ` Bart Van Assche
2017-10-04 15:43 ` Ming Lei
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=20171003205841.GN3666@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=ONeukum@suse.com \
--cc=bart.vanassche@wdc.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=nborisov@suse.com \
--cc=oleg.b.antonyan@gmail.com \
--cc=oleksandr@natalenko.name \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=todd.e.brandt@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).