Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

vn_lock_pair(): allow to request shared locking
ClosedPublic

Authored by kib on Apr 6 2023, 4:13 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 21 2024, 10:59 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 17 2024, 4:10 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 17 2024, 4:05 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 15 2024, 9:02 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 9 2024, 9:05 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 9 2024, 3:08 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 8 2024, 11:43 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 7 2024, 8:13 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

If either of vnodes is shared locked, lock must not be recursed.

Diff Detail

Repository
rG FreeBSD src repository
Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped

Event Timeline

kib requested review of this revision.Apr 6 2023, 4:13 AM

just a note this is going to need a __freebsd_version bump due to zfs

sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3792

does this matter? will not this transparently upgrade to exclusive internally?

point is while lockmgr is the standard thing today, it adds knowledge about it when it perhaps can be avoided

LGTM. mjg@ can decide if he needs this for his
patch against zfs_copy_file_range().

If/when it goes into main, I'll take a look at changing
nfs_copy_file_range() to use it as well.

sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3792

I think this is needed here for the check
on lkflags1 done at line#3791 just below.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Apr 6 2023, 3:23 PM
sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3803

How do you know that the vnode isn't locked by another thread?

kib marked 3 inline comments as done.Apr 6 2023, 6:17 PM
kib added inline comments.
sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3792

Yes the code needs to differentiate between vnode states for real, to properly unlock. If this causes a negative feeling, we can add a predicate function testing for LK_NOSHARE, to hide the implementation.

3803

This is wrong, of course. Hopefully updated version corrects the block.

kib marked 2 inline comments as done.

Do not check sharers to detect recursion. Just handle the case where the current lock type does not match the request (i.e. LK_SHARED lock, but need LK_EXCLUSIVE).

This revision now requires review to proceed.Apr 6 2023, 6:18 PM
sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3798

I still don't understand how this can work. ASSERT_VOP_UNLOCKED() just looks at the lock state, it does not consult witness.

3816
3817
3833

Can the three lines above be replaced with

while (!vp1_locked || !vp2_locked)

?

kib marked 4 inline comments as done.Apr 7 2023, 2:05 PM
kib added inline comments.
sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3798

Exactly what are you asking about? VOP_UNLOCK() unlock the lock once, if it is recursed, the lock is still owned. ASSERT_VOP_UNLOCKED() is false-positive-safe, in fact it only checks that the lock is not exclusively owned by the current thread.

kib marked an inline comment as done.

s/vp2/vp1/ in assert
Untangle loop expression

markj added inline comments.
sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c
3798

I see, I missed that it only checks for exclusive ownership.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Apr 7 2023, 2:08 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.