From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frederic Weisbecker Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock inside get_neighbors() Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 15:25:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20090501132506.GD6011@nowhere> References: <1241145862-21700-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1241145862-21700-5-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <20090501055135.GF5983@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=HSWmj78yERM+6Yk9RbJpwGn8Li5e2M5qLhB0jFSm0qo=; b=NkaV2ikPzDjYxqkzOwFOWnzu8DSDrdLVHHzWz0Foiy2UH99rQ6Et2VPO5OVGyNWdb6 wjvnmEaXswFqWDPH+B6iWzxvTImmL3hXUi9y0H9zIb/vj6wOfDjRtvqDKfrjoJ59BanY gEiv2zOzJPwZgde4Ss7o9LvPb7xK8hF2OK8lk= Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090501055135.GF5983@elte.hu> Sender: reiserfs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Ingo Molnar Cc: LKML , Jeff Mahoney , ReiserFS Development List , Chris Mason , Alexander Beregalov , Alessio Igor Bogani , Jonathan Corbet , Alexander Viro On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 07:51:35AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > get_neighbors() is used to get the left and/or right blocks > > against a given one in order to balance a tree. > > > > sb_bread() is used to read the buffer of these neighors blocks and > > while it waits for this operation, it might sleep. > > > > The bkl was released at this point, and then we can also release > > the write lock before calling sb_bread(). > > > > This is safe because if the filesystem is changed after this lock > > release, the function returns REPEAT_SEARCH (aka SCHEDULE_OCCURRED > > in the function header comments) in order to repeat the neighbhor > > research. > > > > [ Impact: release the reiserfs write lock when it is not needed ] > > This should also be safe because under the BKL we _already_ dropped > the lock when sb_bread() blocked (which it really would in the > normal case). > > There's one special case to consider though: sb_read() maps to > __bread() which can return without sleeping if the bh is already > uptodate. So if the filesystem _knows_ that the bh is already > uptodate and holds a reference to it (this is common pattern in > filesystems), it can have a locking assumption on that. > > No such assumption seems to be present here though. > > Ingo Yeah, fortunately it doesn't base its check on the state of the buffer but on the tree number of rebalancing. But I have to remember this pattern, it could be present elsewhere in reiserfs. Thanks.