Skip to contentSkip to conversation

VFS: call synchronize_rcu after kill_sb.

PATCH In review Tao Ma 4 participants 7 messages Feb 5, 2011 – Feb 9, 2011 VFS

lore
Share & tools
lore

Tao Ma

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 VFS: call synchronize_rcu after kill_sb.

From: Tao Ma <[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call synchronize_rcu after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Chris Mason[2]. I tested with ext4 by umount+rmmod and it doesn't show any error by now.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro <[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason <[email protected]>
Cc Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]>
---
 fs/super.c |    7 +++++++
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +7 -0
index 74e149e..315bce9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		synchronize_rcu();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {
Signature · 1 line
1.6.3.GIT
#1 lore raw
Quoted 31 lines · Tao Ma

From: Tao Ma <[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call synchronize_rcu after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Chris Mason[2]. I tested with ext4 by umount+rmmod and it doesn't show any error by now.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro <[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason <[email protected]>
Cc Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]>
---
 fs/super.c |    7 +++++++
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +0 -0
index 74e149e..315bce9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);

fs/super.c void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s) · line 189

Quoted 10 lines
fs/super.c +7 -0
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		synchronize_rcu();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {

Sorry for not testing sooner.

The above does not work I still get the exact same crash!!

Looking at the code for synchronize_rcu() it looks like it might not be enough. It looks like all it does is a memory barrier. But we need something that will actually pump these pending releases.
(I might be way off here)

BTW after I get the Warning from the kmem_cache_destroy:
slab error in kmem_cache_destroy(): cache `exofs_inode_cache': Can't free all objects

Call Trace: 
754efe08:  [<6007e9a6>] kmem_cache_destroy+0x82/0xca
754efe38:  [<7a9296ba>] exit_exofs+0x1a/0x1c [exofs]
754efe48:  [<60054c10>] sys_delete_module+0x1b9/0x217
754efee8:  [<60014d60>] handle_syscall+0x58/0x70
754eff08:  [<60024163>] userspace+0x2dd/0x38a
754effc8:  [<600126af>] fork_handler+0x62/0x69

I also get a Kernel crash. I suspect it's when finally these free_rcu come and the module (and kmem_cache) are no longer there.

What to do? Nick?

Boaz

#2 lore raw
Quoted 64 lines · Boaz Harrosh
Quoted 31 lines · Tao Ma

From: Tao Ma <[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call synchronize_rcu after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Chris Mason[2]. I tested with ext4 by umount+rmmod and it doesn't show any error by now.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro <[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason <[email protected]>
Cc Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]>
---
 fs/super.c |    7 +++++++
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +0 -0
index 74e149e..315bce9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);

fs/super.c void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s) · line 189

Quoted 10 lines
fs/super.c +7 -0
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		synchronize_rcu();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {

Sorry for not testing sooner.

The above does not work I still get the exact same crash!!

Looking at the code for synchronize_rcu() it looks like it might not be enough. It looks like all it does is a memory barrier. But we need something that will actually pump these pending releases.
(I might be way off here)

BTW after I get the Warning from the kmem_cache_destroy:
slab error in kmem_cache_destroy(): cache `exofs_inode_cache': Can't free all objects

Call Trace: 
754efe08:  [<6007e9a6>] kmem_cache_destroy+0x82/0xca
754efe38:  [<7a9296ba>] exit_exofs+0x1a/0x1c [exofs]
754efe48:  [<60054c10>] sys_delete_module+0x1b9/0x217
754efee8:  [<60014d60>] handle_syscall+0x58/0x70
754eff08:  [<60024163>] userspace+0x2dd/0x38a
754effc8:  [<600126af>] fork_handler+0x62/0x69
Quoted 4 lines

I also get a Kernel crash. I suspect it's when finally these free_rcu come and the module (and kmem_cache) are no longer there.

What to do? Nick?

http://lwn.net/Articles/217484/ explains how to wait for rcu callback to finish

-aneesh

#3 lore raw
Quoted 37 lines · Aneesh Kumar K. V
Quoted 36 lines · Boaz Harrosh
Quoted 35 lines · Tao Ma

From: Tao Ma <[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call synchronize_rcu after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Chris Mason[2]. I tested with ext4 by umount+rmmod and it doesn't show any error by now.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro <[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason <[email protected]>
Cc Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]>
---
 fs/super.c |    7 +++++++
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +4 -0
index 74e149e..315bce9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines

fs/super.c void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s) · line 189

Quoted 6 lines
fs/super.c +3 -0
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		synchronize_rcu();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {

<>

Quoted 4 lines

http://lwn.net/Articles/217484/ explains how to wait for rcu callback to finish

-aneesh

Yes thanks Aneesh, rcu_barrier does the trick
---
From: Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call rcu_barrier after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Aneesh Kumar. rcu_barrier will wait for all callbacks to end before preceding. The original patch was done by Tao Ma, but synchronize_rcu() is not enough here.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro <[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason <[email protected]>
Cc Tao Ma <[email protected]>

---
git diff --stat -p -M fs/super.c

 fs/super.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +7 -0
index 74e149e..5fd4ec9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		rcu_barrier();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {
author Tested-by
#4 lore raw
Quoted 70 lines · Boaz Harrosh
Quoted 40 lines · Aneesh Kumar K. V
Quoted 38 lines · Boaz Harrosh
Quoted 36 lines · Tao Ma

From: Tao Ma<[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call synchronize_rcu after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Chris Mason[2]. I tested with ext4 by umount+rmmod and it doesn't show any error by now.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

Cc Nick Piggin<[email protected]>
Cc Al Viro<[email protected]>
Cc Chris Mason<[email protected]>
Cc Boaz Harrosh<[email protected]>
---
  fs/super.c |    7 +++++++
  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +5 -0
index 74e149e..315bce9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
  		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 8 lines

fs/super.c void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s) · line 189

Quoted 6 lines
fs/super.c +2 -0
+		 */
+		synchronize_rcu();
  		put_filesystem(fs);
  		put_super(s);
  	} else {

<>

Quoted 4 lines

http://lwn.net/Articles/217484/ explains how to wait for rcu callback to finish

-aneesh

Yes thanks Aneesh, rcu_barrier does the trick
---
From: Boaz Harrosh<[email protected]>

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a problem when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call rcu_barrier after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Aneesh Kumar. rcu_barrier will wait for all callbacks to end before preceding. The original patch was done by Tao Ma, but synchronize_rcu() is not enough here.

Quoted 9 lines

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2
2. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129684698713709&w=2

It works now in my ext4 test box. Thanks for your work.

Quoted 28 lines

---
git diff --stat -p -M fs/super.c

  fs/super.c |    1 +
  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +7 -1
index 74e149e..5fd4ec9 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,13 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
  	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
  	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
  		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */
+		rcu_barrier();
  		put_filesystem(fs);
  		put_super(s);
  	} else {
--

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

#5 lore raw
In reply to Boaz Harrosh

fs/super.c void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s) · line 185

Quoted 6 lines
fs/super.c +6 -0
+		/*
+		 * We need to synchronize rcu here so that
+		 * the delayed rcu inode free can be executed
+		 * before we put_super.
+		 * https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27652
+		 */

URLs in comments are not useful, descriptions of the issues in comments should be complete enough to understand the issue. I think the comment without the url is enough, though.

#6 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 VFS: call rcu_barrier after kill_sb.

In fa0d7e3, we use rcu free inode instead of freeing the inode directly. It causes a crash when we rmmod immediately after we umount the volume[1].

So we need to call rcu_barrier after we kill_sb so that the inode is freed before we do rmmod. The idea is inspired by Aneesh Kumar. rcu_barrier will wait for all callbacks to end before preceding. The original patch was done by Tao Ma, but synchronize_rcu() is not enough here.

1. http://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=129680863330185&w=2

---
 fs/super.c |    5 +++++
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
fs/super.c +5 -0
index 74e149e..7e9dd4c 100644
@@ -177,6 +177,11 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
 	struct file_system_type *fs = s->s_type;
 	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&s->s_active)) {
 		fs->kill_sb(s);
+		/*
+		 * We need to call rcu_barrier so all the delayed rcu free
+		 * inodes are flushed before we release the fs module.
+		 */
+		rcu_barrier();
 		put_filesystem(fs);
 		put_super(s);
 	} else {
Signature · 1 line
1.7.2.3