]>
Commit | Line | Data |
---|---|---|
7d200960 | 1 | $Id: README.Locking,v 1.12 2005/04/13 13:22:35 dwmw2 Exp $ |
1da177e4 LT |
2 | |
3 | JFFS2 LOCKING DOCUMENTATION | |
4 | --------------------------- | |
5 | ||
6 | At least theoretically, JFFS2 does not require the Big Kernel Lock | |
7 | (BKL), which was always helpfully obtained for it by Linux 2.4 VFS | |
8 | code. It has its own locking, as described below. | |
9 | ||
10 | This document attempts to describe the existing locking rules for | |
11 | JFFS2. It is not expected to remain perfectly up to date, but ought to | |
12 | be fairly close. | |
13 | ||
14 | ||
15 | alloc_sem | |
16 | --------- | |
17 | ||
18 | The alloc_sem is a per-filesystem semaphore, used primarily to ensure | |
19 | contiguous allocation of space on the medium. It is automatically | |
20 | obtained during space allocations (jffs2_reserve_space()) and freed | |
21 | upon write completion (jffs2_complete_reservation()). Note that | |
22 | the garbage collector will obtain this right at the beginning of | |
23 | jffs2_garbage_collect_pass() and release it at the end, thereby | |
24 | preventing any other write activity on the file system during a | |
25 | garbage collect pass. | |
26 | ||
27 | When writing new nodes, the alloc_sem must be held until the new nodes | |
28 | have been properly linked into the data structures for the inode to | |
29 | which they belong. This is for the benefit of NAND flash - adding new | |
30 | nodes to an inode may obsolete old ones, and by holding the alloc_sem | |
31 | until this happens we ensure that any data in the write-buffer at the | |
32 | time this happens are part of the new node, not just something that | |
33 | was written afterwards. Hence, we can ensure the newly-obsoleted nodes | |
34 | don't actually get erased until the write-buffer has been flushed to | |
35 | the medium. | |
36 | ||
37 | With the introduction of NAND flash support and the write-buffer, | |
38 | the alloc_sem is also used to protect the wbuf-related members of the | |
39 | jffs2_sb_info structure. Atomically reading the wbuf_len member to see | |
40 | if the wbuf is currently holding any data is permitted, though. | |
41 | ||
42 | Ordering constraints: See f->sem. | |
43 | ||
44 | ||
45 | File Semaphore f->sem | |
46 | --------------------- | |
47 | ||
48 | This is the JFFS2-internal equivalent of the inode semaphore i->i_sem. | |
49 | It protects the contents of the jffs2_inode_info private inode data, | |
50 | including the linked list of node fragments (but see the notes below on | |
51 | erase_completion_lock), etc. | |
52 | ||
53 | The reason that the i_sem itself isn't used for this purpose is to | |
54 | avoid deadlocks with garbage collection -- the VFS will lock the i_sem | |
55 | before calling a function which may need to allocate space. The | |
56 | allocation may trigger garbage-collection, which may need to move a | |
57 | node belonging to the inode which was locked in the first place by the | |
58 | VFS. If the garbage collection code were to attempt to lock the i_sem | |
59 | of the inode from which it's garbage-collecting a physical node, this | |
60 | lead to deadlock, unless we played games with unlocking the i_sem | |
61 | before calling the space allocation functions. | |
62 | ||
63 | Instead of playing such games, we just have an extra internal | |
64 | semaphore, which is obtained by the garbage collection code and also | |
65 | by the normal file system code _after_ allocation of space. | |
66 | ||
67 | Ordering constraints: | |
68 | ||
69 | 1. Never attempt to allocate space or lock alloc_sem with | |
70 | any f->sem held. | |
71 | 2. Never attempt to lock two file semaphores in one thread. | |
72 | No ordering rules have been made for doing so. | |
73 | ||
74 | ||
75 | erase_completion_lock spinlock | |
76 | ------------------------------ | |
77 | ||
78 | This is used to serialise access to the eraseblock lists, to the | |
79 | per-eraseblock lists of physical jffs2_raw_node_ref structures, and | |
80 | (NB) the per-inode list of physical nodes. The latter is a special | |
81 | case - see below. | |
82 | ||
83 | As the MTD API no longer permits erase-completion callback functions | |
84 | to be called from bottom-half (timer) context (on the basis that nobody | |
85 | ever actually implemented such a thing), it's now sufficient to use | |
86 | a simple spin_lock() rather than spin_lock_bh(). | |
87 | ||
88 | Note that the per-inode list of physical nodes (f->nodes) is a special | |
89 | case. Any changes to _valid_ nodes (i.e. ->flash_offset & 1 == 0) in | |
90 | the list are protected by the file semaphore f->sem. But the erase | |
91 | code may remove _obsolete_ nodes from the list while holding only the | |
92 | erase_completion_lock. So you can walk the list only while holding the | |
93 | erase_completion_lock, and can drop the lock temporarily mid-walk as | |
94 | long as the pointer you're holding is to a _valid_ node, not an | |
95 | obsolete one. | |
96 | ||
97 | The erase_completion_lock is also used to protect the c->gc_task | |
98 | pointer when the garbage collection thread exits. The code to kill the | |
99 | GC thread locks it, sends the signal, then unlocks it - while the GC | |
100 | thread itself locks it, zeroes c->gc_task, then unlocks on the exit path. | |
101 | ||
102 | ||
103 | inocache_lock spinlock | |
104 | ---------------------- | |
105 | ||
106 | This spinlock protects the hashed list (c->inocache_list) of the | |
107 | in-core jffs2_inode_cache objects (each inode in JFFS2 has the | |
108 | correspondent jffs2_inode_cache object). So, the inocache_lock | |
109 | has to be locked while walking the c->inocache_list hash buckets. | |
110 | ||
7d200960 DW |
111 | This spinlock also covers allocation of new inode numbers, which is |
112 | currently just '++->highest_ino++', but might one day get more complicated | |
113 | if we need to deal with wrapping after 4 milliard inode numbers are used. | |
114 | ||
1da177e4 LT |
115 | Note, the f->sem guarantees that the correspondent jffs2_inode_cache |
116 | will not be removed. So, it is allowed to access it without locking | |
117 | the inocache_lock spinlock. | |
118 | ||
119 | Ordering constraints: | |
120 | ||
121 | If both erase_completion_lock and inocache_lock are needed, the | |
122 | c->erase_completion has to be acquired first. | |
123 | ||
124 | ||
125 | erase_free_sem | |
126 | -------------- | |
127 | ||
128 | This semaphore is only used by the erase code which frees obsolete | |
129 | node references and the jffs2_garbage_collect_deletion_dirent() | |
130 | function. The latter function on NAND flash must read _obsolete_ nodes | |
131 | to determine whether the 'deletion dirent' under consideration can be | |
132 | discarded or whether it is still required to show that an inode has | |
133 | been unlinked. Because reading from the flash may sleep, the | |
134 | erase_completion_lock cannot be held, so an alternative, more | |
135 | heavyweight lock was required to prevent the erase code from freeing | |
136 | the jffs2_raw_node_ref structures in question while the garbage | |
137 | collection code is looking at them. | |
138 | ||
139 | Suggestions for alternative solutions to this problem would be welcomed. | |
140 | ||
141 | ||
142 | wbuf_sem | |
143 | -------- | |
144 | ||
145 | This read/write semaphore protects against concurrent access to the | |
146 | write-behind buffer ('wbuf') used for flash chips where we must write | |
147 | in blocks. It protects both the contents of the wbuf and the metadata | |
148 | which indicates which flash region (if any) is currently covered by | |
149 | the buffer. | |
150 | ||
151 | Ordering constraints: | |
152 | Lock wbuf_sem last, after the alloc_sem or and f->sem. |