Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1337350
| From | Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches |
| Date | 2016-02-18 14:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r3wOC-66U-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <r3iLE-4sg-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3j50-4A2-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3jol-4YQ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3txo-3CY-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <r3wvh-5Xo-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi Tejun, On Thu 18-02-16 08:00:33, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:55:38AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > > I'm not sure I understand the question. Do you mean why both s_active and > > s_umount rwsem exist? s_active is a reference count keeping superblock > > Yes. > > > alive - e.g. if the filesystem is mounted in more places, we need a > > reference for each mountpoint. s_umount is used when we want to block any > > I could be mistaken but I *think* we used to reject umounts based on > s_active and s_umount is the mechanism to delay umounts rather than > failing them and probably with bind mounts the behavior changed. > > > umount operation until we are done. For example sync(2) is using it to make > > sure superblock doesn't disappear and so that we don't keep superblock > > alive after admin called umount(2). > > So, the question is why aren't we just using s_active and draining it > on umount of the last mountpoint. Because, right now, the behavior is > weird in that we allow umounts to proceed but then let the superblock > hang onto the block device till s_active is drained. This really > should be synchronous. Hum, I'm not sure. I guess Al can give you more qualified answer than me. Added to CC... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@suse.com> SUSE Labs, CR
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-16 19:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2016-02-16 19:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-02-17 22:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-17 22:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-02-17 23:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@google.com> - 2016-02-17 23:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-18 00:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-02-18 11:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-18 14:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> - 2016-02-18 14:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-02-19 21:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-19 22:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-02-19 23:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-19 23:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2016-02-19 23:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Nikolay Borisov <kernel@kyup.com> - 2016-02-18 11:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH block/for-4.5-fixes] writeback: keep superblock pinned during cgroup writeback association switches Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2016-02-18 14:00 +0100
csiph-web