Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:48:38 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc:     Boaz Harrosh <boaz@plexistor.com>, Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>,
        peterz@infradead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] locking/percpu-rwsem: use this_cpu_{inc|dec}() for
 read_count
Message-ID: <20200917124838.GT5449@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20200915140750.137881-1-houtao1@huawei.com>
 <20200915150610.GC2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200915153113.GA6881@redhat.com>
 <20200915155150.GD2674@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200915160344.GH35926@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <b885ce8e-4b0b-8321-c2cc-ee8f42de52d4@huawei.com>
 <ddd5d732-06da-f8f2-ba4a-686c58297e47@plexistor.com>
 <20200917120132.GA5602@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200917120132.GA5602@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 02:01:33PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> IIUC, file_end_write() was never IRQ safe (at least if !CONFIG_SMP), even
> before 8129ed2964 ("change sb_writers to use percpu_rw_semaphore"), but this
> doesn't matter...
> 
> Perhaps we can change aio.c, io_uring.c and fs/overlayfs/file.c to avoid
> file_end_write() in IRQ context, but I am not sure it's worth the trouble.

If we change bio_endio to invoke the ->bi_end_io callbacks in softirq
context instead of hardirq context, we can change the pagecache to take
BH-safe locks instead of IRQ-safe locks.  I believe the only reason the
lock needs to be IRQ-safe is for the benefit of paths like:

mpage_end_io
page_endio
end_page_writeback
test_clear_page_writeback

Admittedly, I haven't audited all the places that call end_page_writeback;
there might be others called from non-BIO contexts (network filesystems?).
That was the point where I gave up my investigation of why we use an
IRQ-safe spinlock when basically all page cache operations are done
from user context.