lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ocfs2: ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker does not distinguish lock level
On Thu, 10 May 2018 13:32:30 +0800 Larry Chen <lchen@suse.com> wrote:

> ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker as a variant of ocfs2_inode_lock,
> is used to prevent deadlock due to recursive lock acquisition.
>
> But this function does not distinguish
> whether the requested level is EX or PR.
>
> If a RP lock has been attained, this function
> will immediately return success afterwards even
> an EX lock is requested.
>
> But actually the return value does not mean that
> the process got a EX lock, because ocfs2_inode_lock
> has not been called.
>
> When taking lock levels into account, we face some different situations.
> 1. no lock is held
> In this case, just lock the inode and return 0
>
> 2. We are holding a lock
> For this situation, things diverges into several cases
>
> wanted holding what to do
> ex ex see 2.1 below
> ex pr see 2.2 below
> pr ex see 2.1 below
> pr pr see 2.1 below
>
> 2.1 lock level that is been held is compatible
> with the wanted level, so no lock action will be tacken.
>
> 2.2 Otherwise, an upgrade is needed, but it is forbidden.
>
> Reason why upgrade within a process is forbidden is that
> lock upgrade may cause dead lock. The following illustrate
> how it happens.
>
> process 1 process 2
> ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker(ex=0)
> <====== ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker(ex=1)
>
> ocfs2_inode_lock_tracker(ex=1)
>

Nice changelog, but it gives no information about the severity of the
bug: how often does it hit and what is the end-user impact.

This info is needed so that I and others can decide which kernel
version(s) need the patch, so please always include it when fixing a
bug, thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-10 23:50    [W:0.111 / U:1.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site