linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	yu kuai <yukuai3@huawei.com>,
	rafael@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, mchehab+samsung@kernel.org,
	corbet@lwn.net, tytso@mit.edu, jmorris@namei.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	zhengbin13@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
	chenxiang66@hisilicon.com, xiexiuqi@huawei.com
Subject: [RFC] simple_recursive_removal()
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 18:42:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191115184209.GT26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191115175423.GS26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 05:54:23PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> Anyway, AFAICS removal could be done this way:
> 
> // parent is held exclusive, after is NULL or a child of parent
> find_next_child(parent, prev)
> 	child = NULL
> 	node = prev ? &prev->d_child : &parent->d_subdirs;
> 	grab parent->d_lock
> 	for each entry in the list starting at node->next
> 		d = container_of(entry, struct dentry, d_child)
> 		grab d->d_lock
> 		if simple_positive(d)
> 			bump d->d_count
> 			child = d
> 		drop d->d_lock
> 		if child
> 			break
> 	drop parent->d_lock
> 	dput(prev);
> 	return child
> 
> kill_it(victim, parent)
> 	if simple_positive(victim)
> 		d_invalidate(victim);	// needed to avoid lost mounts
> 		if victim is a directory
> 			fsnotify_rmdir
> 		else
> 			fsnotify_unlink
> 		if victim is regular
> 			__debugfs_file_removed(victim)
> 		dput(victim)		// unpin it
> 
> recursive_removal(dentry)
> 	this = dentry;
> 	while (true) {
> 		victim = NULL;
> 		inode = this->d_inode;
> 		inode_lock(inode);
> 		if (d_is_dir(this))
> 			mark this doomed
> 		while ((child = find_next_child(this, victim)) == NULL) {
> 			// no children (left); kill and ascend
> 			// update metadata while it's still locked
> 			inode->i_ctime = current_time(inode);
> 			clear_nlink(inode);
> 			inode_unlock(inode);
> 			victim = this;
> 			this = this->d_parent;
> 			inode = this->d_inode;
> 			inode_lock(inode);
> 			kill_it(victim, this);
> 			if (victim == dentry) {
> 				inode->i_ctime = inode->i_mtime = current_time(inode);
> 				if (d_is_dir(dentry))
> 					drop_nlink(inode);
> 				inode_unlock(inode);
> 				dput(dentry);
> 				return;
> 			}
> 		}
> 		inode_unlock(inode);
> 		this = child;
> 	}

Come to think of that, if we use IS_DEADDIR as "no more additions" marking,
that looks like a good candidate for all in-kernel rm -rf on ramfs-style
filesystems without cross-directory renames.  This bit in kill_it() above
 		if victim is regular
 			__debugfs_file_removed(victim)
would be an fs-specific callback passed by the caller, turning the whole
thing into this:

void simple_recursive_removal(struct dentry *dentry,
			      void (*callback)(struct dentry *))
{
	struct dentry *this = dentry;
	while (true) {
		struct dentry *victim = NULL, *child;
		struct inode *inode = this->d_inode;

		inode_lock(inode);
		if (d_is_dir(this))
			inode->i_flags |= S_DEAD;
		while ((child = find_next_child(this, victim)) == NULL) {
			// kill and ascend
			// update metadata while it's still locked
			inode->i_ctime = current_time(inode);
			clear_nlink(inode);
			inode_unlock(inode);
			victim = this;
			this = this->d_parent;
			inode = this->d_inode;
			inode_lock(inode);
			if (simple_positive(victim)) {
		 		d_invalidate(victim);	// avoid lost mounts
				if (is_dir(victim))
					fsnotify_rmdir(inode, victim);
				else
					fsnotify_unlink(inode, victim);
				if (callback)
					callback(victim);
				dput(victim)		// unpin it
			}
			if (victim == dentry) {
				inode->i_ctime = inode->i_mtime =
					current_time(inode);
				if (d_is_dir(dentry))
					drop_nlink(inode);
				inode_unlock(inode);
				dput(dentry);
				return;
			}
		}
		inode_unlock(inode);
		this = child;
	}
}

with find_next_child() easily implemented via scan_positives() already
in libfs.c...  Objections?  The above is obviously completely untested,
and I've got nowhere near enough sleep, so there may be any number of
brown paperbag bugs in it.  Review would be very welcome...

  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-15 18:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-15  3:27 [PATCH 0/3] fix potential infinite loop in debugfs_remove_recursive yu kuai
2019-11-15  3:27 ` [PATCH 1/3] dcache: add a new enum type for 'dentry_d_lock_class' yu kuai
2019-11-15  3:27   ` Greg KH
2019-11-15  4:12     ` Al Viro
2019-11-15  7:20       ` Greg KH
2019-11-15 10:08         ` yukuai (C)
2019-11-15 13:16         ` Al Viro
2019-11-15 13:38           ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-15 13:39             ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-15 13:48             ` Al Viro
2019-11-15 13:58               ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-15 14:17                 ` Al Viro
2019-11-15 17:54                   ` Al Viro
2019-11-15 18:42                     ` Al Viro [this message]
2019-11-15 19:41                       ` [RFC] simple_recursive_removal() Al Viro
2019-11-15 21:18                         ` Al Viro
2019-11-15 21:26                           ` Steven Rostedt
2019-11-15 22:10                             ` Al Viro
2019-11-16 12:04                               ` Greg KH
2019-11-17 22:24                               ` Al Viro
2019-11-18  6:37                                 ` Greg KH
2019-11-15 10:02     ` [PATCH 1/3] dcache: add a new enum type for 'dentry_d_lock_class' yukuai (C)
2019-11-15  3:27 ` [PATCH 2/3] fs/libfs.c: use 'spin_lock_nested' when taking 'd_lock' for dentry in simple_empty yu kuai
2019-11-15  3:27 ` [PATCH 3/3] debugfs: fix potential infinite loop in debugfs_remove_recursive yu kuai

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=20191115184209.GT26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=chenxiang66@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mchehab+samsung@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=xiexiuqi@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yukuai3@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhengbin13@huawei.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).