From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, tytso@mit.edu
References: <87fvlm860e.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<20140409232423.GB18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<87lhva5h4k.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<20140413053956.GM18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<87zjjp3e7w.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<87ppkl1xb7.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<20140413215242.GP18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<87y4z8uzqw.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<87ppkhc4pp.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<87ha5r3emw.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
	<20140417202237.GA18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 14:23:27 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20140417202237.GA18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (Al Viro's message of
	"Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:22:37 +0100")
Message-ID: <87tx9rwsz4.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Detaching mounts on unlink for 3.15
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> writes:

> Have you tried to profile something like umount -l on a large mount tree?
> You variant causes a shitstorm of
> 	schedule work
> 	switch to workqueue
> 	do actual fs shutdown
> 	wake umount(8) up
> 	get through wait_for_completion()
> for every bleeding vfsmount in there.  And no, it's *not* guaranteed to
> be dominated by fs shutdown time.  Here's the case where it definitely
> won't be:
> 	mkdir /tmp/a
> 	mount --rbind / /tmp/a
> 	umount -l /tmp/a
>
> All vfsmounts involved are killed off with no fs shutdown.  And that's
> *not* a rare case - exit of the last process in namespace is very likely
> to look that way too.
>
> That's far too heavy.

The typically system has about 12 mounts and no mount namespaces.
Making umount of any kind a rare case.

Al my apologies for not picking your favorite solution and in choosing
not to audit every call to mntput in the tree this week I have made an
uncommon case slower.

These bug fixes are important, the code is correct, and it is
technically straight forward to remove the wait in mntput in most
cases.

I am very frustrated that when given lots of opportunities to look at
and comment on my code it is hard to get you to engage and comment
unless I send a pull request to Linus.

This last objection really looks to be a case of perfection getting in
the way of the good.

Eric

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/