From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [LSF/MM/BPF TOPIC] Replacing TASK_(UN)INTERRUPTIBLE with regions of uninterruptibility
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 04:43:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <upsunciif2s554by65dpx6e5iw76ksl44jnqzssamv4wi422gr@pxyqmtyrpue4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegtOiiBqhFeFBbuaY=TaS2xMafLOES=LHdNx8BhwUz7aCg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 10:08:59AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 at 09:51, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have various locks, mutexes, etc., that are taken on entry to filesystem
> > code, for example, and a bunch of them are taken interruptibly or killably (or
> > ought to be) - but filesystem code might be called into from uninterruptible
> > code, such as the memory allocator, fscache, etc..
>
> Are you suggesting to make lots more filesystem/vfs/mm sleeps
> killable? That would present problems with being called from certain
> contexts.
>
> Or are there bugs already?
I believe it's both.
Potentially we could get rid of e.g. mutex_lock_interruptible() and
mutex_lock_killable() so our API surface goes down, and I've seen at
least one bug where we were checking for a signal pending and bailing
out where we really didn't want to be.
I think we'd need the new API prototyped in order to have a concrete
discussion though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-02 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-02 8:51 David Howells
2024-02-02 9:08 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-02-02 9:43 ` Kent Overstreet [this message]
2024-02-02 10:30 ` David Howells
2024-02-02 10:46 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-02-02 11:22 ` David Howells
2024-02-02 12:06 ` Miklos Szeredi
2024-02-02 12:44 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-02-02 16:23 ` Al Viro
2024-02-03 17:27 ` Kent Overstreet
2024-02-02 13:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
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=upsunciif2s554by65dpx6e5iw76ksl44jnqzssamv4wi422gr@pxyqmtyrpue4 \
--to=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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