Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] FUSE: Retire superblock on force unmount

[Daniil Lunev]

I have prepared the v3 patch as described in my previous email. PTAL.

Thanks,
Daniil

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 8:44 AM Daniil Lunev <dlunev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Calling bdi_unregister() might be okay, and that should fix this.  I'm
> > not familiar enough with that part to say for sure.
> > But freeing sb->s_bdi while the superblock is active looks problematic.
> Tracing the code, I see that, yes, in general that might not be safe to call
> the "bdi_put" function for any FS - because it might have in-flight ops even
> with force, where they will routinely access the members of the bdi struct
> without locks. However, we do replace the struct with a no_op version,
> and specifically for the FUSE case we sever the connection first, so no
> in-flight ops can actually be there. And I am not sure if other FS may
> need to do this retirement, given they don't have these
> user-space/kernel split. It would make sense however to delay the actual
> put till  the actual super block destruction, but that would require
> introducing extra state tracking to see if the block is or is not registered
> anymore. It can be piggybacked on the v1 patch where I have an explicit
> state flag, but not on v2.
> Miklos, Al, will the following work and be acceptable?
> Get v1 patchset[1], in fuse_umount_begin do bdi_unregister and set
> the flag, but do not do bdi_put or replacement with no_op. And then in
> generic shutdown super if the bdi is not no_op and the 'defunct' flag is
> set, skip unregister part.
> Thanks,
> Daniil
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20220511013057.245827-1-dlunev@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u