linux/fs/jffs2/README.Locking
<<
>>
Prefs
   1
   2        JFFS2 LOCKING DOCUMENTATION
   3        ---------------------------
   4
   5This document attempts to describe the existing locking rules for
   6JFFS2. It is not expected to remain perfectly up to date, but ought to
   7be fairly close.
   8
   9
  10        alloc_sem
  11        ---------
  12
  13The alloc_sem is a per-filesystem mutex, used primarily to ensure
  14contiguous allocation of space on the medium. It is automatically
  15obtained during space allocations (jffs2_reserve_space()) and freed
  16upon write completion (jffs2_complete_reservation()). Note that
  17the garbage collector will obtain this right at the beginning of
  18jffs2_garbage_collect_pass() and release it at the end, thereby
  19preventing any other write activity on the file system during a
  20garbage collect pass.
  21
  22When writing new nodes, the alloc_sem must be held until the new nodes
  23have been properly linked into the data structures for the inode to
  24which they belong. This is for the benefit of NAND flash - adding new
  25nodes to an inode may obsolete old ones, and by holding the alloc_sem
  26until this happens we ensure that any data in the write-buffer at the
  27time this happens are part of the new node, not just something that
  28was written afterwards. Hence, we can ensure the newly-obsoleted nodes
  29don't actually get erased until the write-buffer has been flushed to
  30the medium.
  31
  32With the introduction of NAND flash support and the write-buffer, 
  33the alloc_sem is also used to protect the wbuf-related members of the
  34jffs2_sb_info structure. Atomically reading the wbuf_len member to see
  35if the wbuf is currently holding any data is permitted, though.
  36
  37Ordering constraints: See f->sem.
  38
  39
  40        File Mutex f->sem
  41        ---------------------
  42
  43This is the JFFS2-internal equivalent of the inode mutex i->i_sem.
  44It protects the contents of the jffs2_inode_info private inode data,
  45including the linked list of node fragments (but see the notes below on
  46erase_completion_lock), etc.
  47
  48The reason that the i_sem itself isn't used for this purpose is to
  49avoid deadlocks with garbage collection -- the VFS will lock the i_sem
  50before calling a function which may need to allocate space. The
  51allocation may trigger garbage-collection, which may need to move a
  52node belonging to the inode which was locked in the first place by the
  53VFS. If the garbage collection code were to attempt to lock the i_sem
  54of the inode from which it's garbage-collecting a physical node, this
  55lead to deadlock, unless we played games with unlocking the i_sem
  56before calling the space allocation functions.
  57
  58Instead of playing such games, we just have an extra internal
  59mutex, which is obtained by the garbage collection code and also
  60by the normal file system code _after_ allocation of space.
  61
  62Ordering constraints: 
  63
  64        1. Never attempt to allocate space or lock alloc_sem with 
  65           any f->sem held.
  66        2. Never attempt to lock two file mutexes in one thread.
  67           No ordering rules have been made for doing so.
  68        3. Never lock a page cache page with f->sem held.
  69
  70
  71        erase_completion_lock spinlock
  72        ------------------------------
  73
  74This is used to serialise access to the eraseblock lists, to the
  75per-eraseblock lists of physical jffs2_raw_node_ref structures, and
  76(NB) the per-inode list of physical nodes. The latter is a special
  77case - see below.
  78
  79As the MTD API no longer permits erase-completion callback functions
  80to be called from bottom-half (timer) context (on the basis that nobody
  81ever actually implemented such a thing), it's now sufficient to use
  82a simple spin_lock() rather than spin_lock_bh().
  83
  84Note that the per-inode list of physical nodes (f->nodes) is a special
  85case. Any changes to _valid_ nodes (i.e. ->flash_offset & 1 == 0) in
  86the list are protected by the file mutex f->sem. But the erase code
  87may remove _obsolete_ nodes from the list while holding only the
  88erase_completion_lock. So you can walk the list only while holding the
  89erase_completion_lock, and can drop the lock temporarily mid-walk as
  90long as the pointer you're holding is to a _valid_ node, not an
  91obsolete one.
  92
  93The erase_completion_lock is also used to protect the c->gc_task
  94pointer when the garbage collection thread exits. The code to kill the
  95GC thread locks it, sends the signal, then unlocks it - while the GC
  96thread itself locks it, zeroes c->gc_task, then unlocks on the exit path.
  97
  98
  99        inocache_lock spinlock
 100        ----------------------
 101
 102This spinlock protects the hashed list (c->inocache_list) of the
 103in-core jffs2_inode_cache objects (each inode in JFFS2 has the
 104correspondent jffs2_inode_cache object). So, the inocache_lock
 105has to be locked while walking the c->inocache_list hash buckets.
 106
 107This spinlock also covers allocation of new inode numbers, which is
 108currently just '++->highest_ino++', but might one day get more complicated
 109if we need to deal with wrapping after 4 milliard inode numbers are used.
 110
 111Note, the f->sem guarantees that the correspondent jffs2_inode_cache
 112will not be removed. So, it is allowed to access it without locking
 113the inocache_lock spinlock. 
 114
 115Ordering constraints: 
 116
 117        If both erase_completion_lock and inocache_lock are needed, the
 118        c->erase_completion has to be acquired first.
 119
 120
 121        erase_free_sem
 122        --------------
 123
 124This mutex is only used by the erase code which frees obsolete node
 125references and the jffs2_garbage_collect_deletion_dirent() function.
 126The latter function on NAND flash must read _obsolete_ nodes to
 127determine whether the 'deletion dirent' under consideration can be
 128discarded or whether it is still required to show that an inode has
 129been unlinked. Because reading from the flash may sleep, the
 130erase_completion_lock cannot be held, so an alternative, more
 131heavyweight lock was required to prevent the erase code from freeing
 132the jffs2_raw_node_ref structures in question while the garbage
 133collection code is looking at them.
 134
 135Suggestions for alternative solutions to this problem would be welcomed.
 136
 137
 138        wbuf_sem
 139        --------
 140
 141This read/write semaphore protects against concurrent access to the
 142write-behind buffer ('wbuf') used for flash chips where we must write
 143in blocks. It protects both the contents of the wbuf and the metadata
 144which indicates which flash region (if any) is currently covered by 
 145the buffer.
 146
 147Ordering constraints:
 148        Lock wbuf_sem last, after the alloc_sem or and f->sem.
 149
 150
 151        c->xattr_sem
 152        ------------
 153
 154This read/write semaphore protects against concurrent access to the
 155xattr related objects which include stuff in superblock and ic->xref.
 156In read-only path, write-semaphore is too much exclusion. It's enough
 157by read-semaphore. But you must hold write-semaphore when updating,
 158creating or deleting any xattr related object.
 159
 160Once xattr_sem released, there would be no assurance for the existence
 161of those objects. Thus, a series of processes is often required to retry,
 162when updating such a object is necessary under holding read semaphore.
 163For example, do_jffs2_getxattr() holds read-semaphore to scan xref and
 164xdatum at first. But it retries this process with holding write-semaphore
 165after release read-semaphore, if it's necessary to load name/value pair
 166from medium.
 167
 168Ordering constraints:
 169        Lock xattr_sem last, after the alloc_sem.
 170