RE: [PATCH v12 02/13] exfat: add super block operations

[Namjae Jeon]

> > +static void exfat_put_super(struct super_block *sb) {
> > +	struct exfat_sb_info *sbi = EXFAT_SB(sb);
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(&sbi->s_lock);
> > +	if (test_and_clear_bit(EXFAT_SB_DIRTY, &sbi->s_state))
> > +		sync_blockdev(sb->s_bdev);
> > +	exfat_set_vol_flags(sb, VOL_CLEAN);
> > +	exfat_free_upcase_table(sb);
> > +	exfat_free_bitmap(sb);
> > +	mutex_unlock(&sbi->s_lock);
> > +
> > +	if (sbi->nls_io) {
> > +		unload_nls(sbi->nls_io);
> > +		sbi->nls_io = NULL;
> > +	}
> > +	exfat_free_iocharset(sbi);
> > +	sb->s_fs_info = NULL;
> > +	kfree(sbi);
> > +}
> 
> You need to RCU-delay freeing sbi and zeroing ->nls_io.  *Everything* used
> by ->d_compare() and ->d_hash() needs that treatment.  RCU-mode pathwalk
> can stray into a filesystem that has already been lazy-umounted and is
> just one close() away from shutdown.  It's OK, as long as you make sure
> that all structures used in methods that could be called in RCU mode (-
> >d_compare(), ->d_hash(), rcu-case ->d_revalidate(), rcu-case -
> >permission()) have destruction RCU-delayed.  Look at what VFAT is doing;
> that's precisely the reason for that delayed_free() thing in there.
Okay.
> 
> > +static void exfat_destroy_inode(struct inode *inode) {
> > +	kmem_cache_free(exfat_inode_cachep, EXFAT_I(inode)); }
> 
> No.  Again, that MUST be RCU-delayed; either put an explicit
> call_rcu() here, or leave as-is, but make that ->free_inode().
Okay.
> 
> > +static void __exit exit_exfat_fs(void) {
> > +	kmem_cache_destroy(exfat_inode_cachep);
> > +	unregister_filesystem(&exfat_fs_type);
> 
> ... and add rcu_barrier() here.
Okay, I will fix them on next version.
Thanks for review!!
> 
> > +	exfat_cache_shutdown();