Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230626201713.1204982-1-surenb@google.com> <ZJn1tQDgfmcE7mNG@slm.duckdns.org>
 <20230627-kanon-hievt-bfdb583ddaa6@brauner> <CAJuCfpECKqYiekDK6Zw58w10n1T4Q3R+2nymfHX2ZGfQVDC3VQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230627-ausgaben-brauhaus-a33e292558d8@brauner>
In-Reply-To: <20230627-ausgaben-brauhaus-a33e292558d8@brauner>
From:   Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2023 10:36:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJuCfpGSntZwfzyeHYOYOcmLJvj80DKTUnj+y-DFVF524C3eVw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernfs: add kernfs_ops.free operation to free
 resources tied to the file
To:     Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, lujialin4@huawei.com,
        lizefan.x@bytedance.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        ebiggers@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
        vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
        bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:30=E2=80=AFAM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.=
org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:09:27AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 1:24=E2=80=AFAM Christian Brauner <brauner@kern=
el.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:31:49AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 01:17:12PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kernfs.h b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > > index 73f5c120def8..a7e404ff31bb 100644
> > > > > --- a/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > > @@ -273,6 +273,11 @@ struct kernfs_ops {
> > > > >      */
> > > > >     int (*open)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > > > >     void (*release)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > > > > +   /*
> > > > > +    * Free resources tied to the lifecycle of the file, like a
> > > > > +    * waitqueue used for polling.
> > > > > +    */
> > > > > +   void (*free)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > > >
> > > > I think this can use a bit more commenting - ie. explain that relea=
se may be
> > > > called earlier than the actual freeing of the file and how that can=
 lead to
> > > > problems. Othre than that, looks fine to me.
> > >
> > > It seems the more natural thing to do would be to introduce a ->drain=
()
> > > operation and order it before ->release(), no?
> >
> > I assume you mean we should add a ->drain() operation and call it when
> > kernfs_drain_open_files()  causes kernfs_release_file()? That would
> > work but if any existing release() handler counts on the current
> > behavior (release() being called while draining) then we should find
> > and fix these. Hopefully they don't really depend on the current
> > behavior but I dunno.
>
> Before I wrote that I did a naive
>
>         > git grep -A 20 kernfs_ops | grep \\.release
>         kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c- .release                =3D cgroup_file_r=
elease,
>         kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c- .release                =3D cgroup_file_r=
elease,
>
> which only gave cgroup_release_file(). Might be I'm missing some convolut=
ed
> callchains though or macro magic...
>
> ->release() was added in
>
>     commit 0e67db2f9fe91937e798e3d7d22c50a8438187e1
>     kernfs: add kernfs_ops->open/release() callbacks
>
>     Add ->open/release() methods to kernfs_ops.  ->open() is called when
>     the file is opened and ->release() when the file is either released o=
r
>     severed.  These callbacks can be used, for example, to manage
>     persistent caching objects over multiple seq_file iterations.
>
>     Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>     Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>     Acked-by: Acked-by: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
>
>
> which mentions "either releases or severed" which imho already points to
> separate methods.

Interesting. I guess we can add op->drain() and make all existing
handlers of ops->release() to handle ops->drain() with the same
handler. That should keep them happy and for my case I'll be releasing
resources only inside ops->release(). Does that sound good?

>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an=
 email to kernel-team+unsubscribe@android.com.
>