From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for 5.20-rc1
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 23:44:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YvWGOKqmuaGm8yCd@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjCa=Xf=pA2Z844WnwEeYgy9OPoB2kWphvg7PVn3ohScw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 03:22:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 3:04 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > FWIW, I wonder if we should do
> > if (READ_ONCE(dentry->d_parent) != parent)
> > continue;
> > before grabbing ->d_lock (and repeat the check after grabbing it,
>
> It kind of makes sense. We already do that d_name.hash check outside
> of the lock, so we already have that "we might race with a rename"
> situation.
>
> That said, I do think __d_lookup_rcu() is the more important of the two.
>
> Here's a recreation of that patch I mentioned where the OP_COMPARE is
> moved out of the loop. Just for fun, look at how much better the code
> generation is for the common case when you don't have the call messing
> up the clobbered registers etc.
>
> Entirely untested, and I might have messed something up, but I suspect
> this is a much bigger deal than whether d_same_name() is inlined or
> not in the non-RCU path.
Looks sane at the first pass, but right now I'm really half-asleep - 5 hours
of sleep tonight, and about the same yesterday ;-/
I'll try to grab at least an hour or two and reread it once I'm more or less
awake...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-11 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-11 15:24 [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for 5.20-rc1 Ilya Dryomov
2022-08-11 20:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 20:55 ` Ilya Dryomov
2022-08-11 21:08 ` Jeff Layton
2022-08-11 21:22 ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:23 ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:30 ` Jeff Layton
2022-08-11 21:38 ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 22:04 ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 22:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 22:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-12 3:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 19:08 ` Al Viro
2022-08-14 20:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 21:20 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-11 22:44 ` Al Viro [this message]
2022-08-11 21:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 21:32 ` pr-tracker-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YvWGOKqmuaGm8yCd@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.