From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: npiggin@suse.de
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/27] fs: cleanup files_lock
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:35:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m163gtz46p.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090425012209.061706790@suse.de> (npiggin@suse.de's message of "Sat\, 25 Apr 2009 11\:20\:21 +1000")
npiggin@suse.de writes:
> Lock tty_files with tty_mutex, provide helpers to manipulate the per-sb
> files list, and unexport the files_lock spinlock.
This conflicts a bit with some of my ongoing work, which is generalizing
the file list to make it more useful and makes the tty case much less
of a special case.
Do you know if the performance improvement would be anywhere near as good if
file_list and file_list_lock becoming per inode?
Do you have any idea what the performance improvement with changing the file_list_lock
is?
> Index: linux-2.6/fs/open.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/fs/open.c
> +++ linux-2.6/fs/open.c
> @@ -828,7 +828,7 @@ static struct file *__dentry_open(struct
> f->f_path.mnt = mnt;
> f->f_pos = 0;
> f->f_op = fops_get(inode->i_fop);
> - file_move(f, &inode->i_sb->s_files);
> + file_sb_list_add(f, inode->i_sb);
You can make this just:
if (!special_file(inode->i_mode))
file_add(f, &inode->i_files);
And save yourself a lot of complexity.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-25 5:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-25 1:20 [patch 00/27] [rfc] vfs scalability patchset npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 01/27] fs: cleanup files_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 3:20 ` Al Viro
2009-04-25 5:35 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2009-04-26 6:12 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-25 9:42 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-26 6:15 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 02/27] fs: scale files_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 3:32 ` Al Viro
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 03/27] fs: mnt_want_write speedup npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 04/27] fs: introduce mnt_clone_write npiggin
2009-04-25 3:35 ` Al Viro
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 05/27] fs: brlock vfsmount_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 3:50 ` Al Viro
2009-04-26 6:36 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 06/27] fs: dcache fix LRU ordering npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 07/27] fs: dcache scale hash npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 08/27] fs: dcache scale lru npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 09/27] fs: dcache scale nr_dentry npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 10/27] fs: dcache scale dentry refcount npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 11/27] fs: dcache scale d_unhashed npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 12/27] fs: dcache scale subdirs npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 13/27] fs: scale inode alias list npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 14/27] fs: use RCU / seqlock logic for reverse and multi-step operaitons npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 15/27] fs: dcache remove dcache_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 16/27] fs: dcache reduce dput locking npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 17/27] fs: dcache per-bucket dcache hash locking npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 18/27] fs: dcache reduce dcache_inode_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 19/27] fs: dcache per-inode inode alias locking npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 20/27] fs: icache lock s_inodes list npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 21/27] fs: icache lock inode hash npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 22/27] fs: icache lock i_state npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 23/27] fs: icache lock i_count npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 24/27] fs: icache atomic inodes_stat npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 25/27] fs: icache lock lru/writeback lists npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 26/27] fs: icache protect inode state npiggin
2009-04-25 1:20 ` [patch 27/27] fs: icache remove inode_lock npiggin
2009-04-25 4:18 ` [patch 00/27] [rfc] vfs scalability patchset Al Viro
2009-04-25 5:02 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-25 8:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-04-25 8:06 ` Al Viro
2009-04-28 9:09 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-04-28 9:48 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-28 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-28 11:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-04-30 6:14 ` Nick Piggin
2009-04-25 19:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-04-25 19:31 ` Al Viro
2009-04-25 20:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-04-25 22:05 ` Theodore Tso
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=m163gtz46p.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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.