Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] RDMA/FS DAX truncate proposal V1,000,002 ;-)
From: Jason Gunthorpe
Date: Wed Aug 21 2019 - 15:48:14 EST
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 11:57:03AM -0700, Ira Weiny wrote:
> > Oh, I didn't think we were talking about that. Hanging the close of
> > the datafile fd contingent on some other FD's closure is a recipe for
> > deadlock..
>
> The discussion between Jan and Dave was concerning what happens when a user
> calls
>
> fd = open()
> fnctl(...getlease...)
> addr = mmap(fd...)
> ib_reg_mr() <pin>
> munmap(addr...)
> close(fd)
I don't see how blocking close(fd) could work. Write it like this:
fd = open()
uverbs = open(/dev/uverbs)
fnctl(...getlease...)
addr = mmap(fd...)
ib_reg_mr() <pin>
munmap(addr...)
<sigkill>
The order FD's are closed during sigkill is not deterministic, so when
all the fputs happen during a kill'd exit we could end up blocking in
close(fd) as close(uverbs) will come after in the close
list. close(uverbs) is the thing that does the dereg_mr and releases
the pin.
We don't need complexity with dup to create problems.
Jason