Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Oct 2022 12:58:50 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: protect s_inodes with s_inode_list_lock | From | JeffleXu <> |
| |
On 10/17/22 9:55 AM, Dawei Li wrote: > s_inodes is superblock-specific resource, which should be > protected by sb's specific lock s_inode_list_lock. > > v2: update the locking mechanisim to protect mutual-exclusive access > both for s_inode_list_lock & erofs_fscache_domain_init_cookie(), as the > reviewing comments from Jia Zhu. > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/TYCP286MB23237A9993E0FFCFE5C2BDBECA269@TYCP286MB2323.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM/ > > base-commit: 8436c4a57bd147b0bd2943ab499bb8368981b9e1 > > Signed-off-by: Dawei Li <set_pte_at@outlook.com>
Fixes: 7d41963759fe ("erofs: Support sharing cookies in the same domain")
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>
> --- > fs/erofs/fscache.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/erofs/fscache.c b/fs/erofs/fscache.c > index 998cd26a1b3b..fe05bc51f9f2 100644 > --- a/fs/erofs/fscache.c > +++ b/fs/erofs/fscache.c > @@ -590,14 +590,17 @@ struct erofs_fscache *erofs_domain_register_cookie(struct super_block *sb, > struct super_block *psb = erofs_pseudo_mnt->mnt_sb; > > mutex_lock(&erofs_domain_cookies_lock); > + spin_lock(&psb->s_inode_list_lock); > list_for_each_entry(inode, &psb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) { > ctx = inode->i_private; > if (!ctx || ctx->domain != domain || strcmp(ctx->name, name)) > continue; > igrab(inode); > + spin_unlock(&psb->s_inode_list_lock); > mutex_unlock(&erofs_domain_cookies_lock); > return ctx; > } > + spin_unlock(&psb->s_inode_list_lock); > ctx = erofs_fscache_domain_init_cookie(sb, name, need_inode); > mutex_unlock(&erofs_domain_cookies_lock); > return ctx;
-- Thanks, Jingbo
| |