The mnt->__mnt_writers can go negative for a time if
a pair of mnt_want_write()/mnt_drop_write() calls is
done on a different cpu, but for the same mount.
This part is expected.

The lock_and_coalesce..() function should make that
count positive (or at least 0).  Hugh Dickins had
found a bug in the unionfs code which caused a
permanent imbalance in this code, and eventually
underflowed the atomic_t mnt->__mnt_writers.

It also locked up the while() loop that expects the
count to go up after it is coalesced.

The following patch won't fix such a unionfs bug, but
it will keep the loop from locking up.  It will also
warn a lot earlier that something funky is going on.

Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---

 linux-2.6.git-dave/fs/namespace.c        |   31 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 linux-2.6.git-dave/include/linux/mount.h |    1 +
 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff -puN fs/namei.c~fix-naughty-loop fs/namei.c
diff -puN fs/namespace.c~fix-naughty-loop fs/namespace.c
--- linux-2.6.git/fs/namespace.c~fix-naughty-loop       2007-11-05 
08:03:59.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.git-dave/fs/namespace.c   2007-11-05 08:35:06.000000000 -0800
@@ -225,16 +225,29 @@ static void lock_and_coalesce_cpu_mnt_wr
  */
 static void handle_write_count_underflow(struct vfsmount *mnt)
 {
-       while (atomic_read(&mnt->__mnt_writers) <
-               MNT_WRITER_UNDERFLOW_LIMIT) {
-               /*
-                * It isn't necessary to hold all of the locks
-                * at the same time, but doing it this way makes
-                * us share a lot more code.
-                */
-               lock_and_coalesce_cpu_mnt_writer_counts();
-               mnt_unlock_cpus();
+       if (atomic_read(&mnt->__mnt_writers) >=
+           MNT_WRITER_UNDERFLOW_LIMIT)
+               return;
+       /*
+        * It isn't necessary to hold all of the locks
+        * at the same time, but doing it this way makes
+        * us share a lot more code.
+        */
+       lock_and_coalesce_cpu_mnt_writer_counts();
+       /*
+        * If coalescing the per-cpu writer counts did not
+        * get us back to a positive writer count, we have
+        * a bug.
+        */
+       if ((atomic_read(&mnt->__mnt_writers) < 0) &&
+           !(mnt->mnt_flags & MNT_IMBALANCED_WRITE_COUNT)) {
+               printk("leak detected on mount(%p) writers count: %d\n",
+                       mnt, atomic_read(&mnt->__mnt_writers));
+               WARN_ON(1);
+               /* use the flag to keep the dmesg spam down */
+               mnt->mnt_flags |= MNT_IMBALANCED_WRITE_COUNT;
        }
+       mnt_unlock_cpus();
 }
 
 /**
diff -puN include/linux/mount.h~fix-naughty-loop include/linux/mount.h
--- linux-2.6.git/include/linux/mount.h~fix-naughty-loop        2007-11-05 
08:22:21.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.git-dave/include/linux/mount.h    2007-11-05 08:28:20.000000000 
-0800
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ struct mnt_namespace;
 #define MNT_READONLY   0x40    /* does the user want this to be r/o? */
 
 #define MNT_SHRINKABLE 0x100
+#define MNT_IMBALANCED_WRITE_COUNT     0x200 /* just for debugging */
 
 #define MNT_SHARED     0x1000  /* if the vfsmount is a shared mount */
 #define MNT_UNBINDABLE 0x2000  /* if the vfsmount is a unbindable mount */
diff -puN include/linux/fs.h~fix-naughty-loop include/linux/fs.h
diff -puN fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c~fix-naughty-loop fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
_
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to