From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 07/11] locks: only pull entries off of blocked_list when they are really unblocked
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 23:07:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1370056054-25449-8-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370056054-25449-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
Currently, when there is a lot of lock contention the kernel spends an
inordinate amount of time taking blocked locks off of the global
blocked_list and then putting them right back on again. When all of this
code was protected by a single lock, then it didn't matter much, but now
it means a lot of file_lock_lock thrashing.
Optimize this a bit by deferring the removal from the blocked_list until
we're either applying or cancelling the lock. By doing this, and using a
lockless list_empty check, we can avoid taking the file_lock_lock in
many cases.
Because the fl_link check is lockless, we must ensure that only the task
that "owns" the request manipulates the fl_link. Also, with this change,
it's possible that we'll see an entry on the blocked_list that has a
NULL fl_next pointer. In that event, just ignore it and continue walking
the list.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
---
fs/locks.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 055c06c..fc35b9e 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -520,7 +520,6 @@ locks_delete_global_locks(struct file_lock *waiter)
static void __locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter)
{
list_del_init(&waiter->fl_block);
- locks_delete_global_blocked(waiter);
waiter->fl_next = NULL;
}
@@ -704,13 +703,16 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(posix_test_lock);
/* Find a lock that the owner of the given block_fl is blocking on. */
static struct file_lock *what_owner_is_waiting_for(struct file_lock *block_fl)
{
- struct file_lock *fl;
+ struct file_lock *fl, *ret = NULL;
list_for_each_entry(fl, &blocked_list, fl_link) {
- if (posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl))
- return fl->fl_next;
+ if (posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl)) {
+ ret = fl->fl_next;
+ if (likely(ret))
+ break;
+ }
}
- return NULL;
+ return ret;
}
static int posix_locks_deadlock(struct file_lock *caller_fl,
@@ -865,7 +867,8 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str
goto out;
error = FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED;
locks_insert_block(fl, request);
- locks_insert_global_blocked(request);
+ if (list_empty(&request->fl_link))
+ locks_insert_global_blocked(request);
goto out;
}
}
@@ -876,6 +879,16 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str
goto out;
/*
+ * Now that we know the request is no longer blocked, we can take it
+ * off the global list. Some callers send down partially initialized
+ * requests, so we only do this if FL_SLEEP is set. Also, avoid taking
+ * the lock if the list is empty, as that indicates a request that
+ * never blocked.
+ */
+ if ((request->fl_flags & FL_SLEEP) && !list_empty(&request->fl_link))
+ locks_delete_global_blocked(request);
+
+ /*
* Find the first old lock with the same owner as the new lock.
*/
@@ -1069,6 +1082,7 @@ int posix_lock_file_wait(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *fl)
continue;
locks_delete_block(fl);
+ locks_delete_global_blocked(fl);
break;
}
return error;
@@ -1147,6 +1161,7 @@ int locks_mandatory_area(int read_write, struct inode *inode,
}
locks_delete_block(&fl);
+ locks_delete_global_blocked(&fl);
break;
}
@@ -1859,6 +1874,7 @@ static int do_lock_file_wait(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd,
continue;
locks_delete_block(fl);
+ locks_delete_global_blocked(fl);
break;
}
@@ -2160,6 +2176,7 @@ posix_unblock_lock(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *waiter)
else
status = -ENOENT;
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
+ locks_delete_global_blocked(waiter);
return status;
}
--
1.7.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-01 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-01 3:07 [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 00/11] locks: scalability improvements for file locking Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 01/11] cifs: use posix_unblock_lock instead of locks_delete_block Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 02/11] locks: make generic_add_lease and generic_delete_lease static Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 03/11] locks: comment cleanups and clarifications Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 22:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 11:09 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 04/11] locks: make "added" in __posix_lock_file a bool Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 20:17 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 05/11] locks: encapsulate the fl_link list handling Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 20:17 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 06/11] locks: convert to i_lock to protect i_flock list Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 0:46 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2013-06-04 21:58 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 07/11] locks: only pull entries off of blocked_list when they are really unblocked J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 11:38 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:24 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 12:38 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 08/11] locks: convert fl_link to a hlist_node Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:46 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 09/11] locks: turn the blocked_list into a hashtable Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 10/11] locks: add a new "lm_owner_key" lock operation Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 11/11] locks: give the blocked_hash its own spinlock Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:19 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2013-06-04 14:39 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-06-04 14:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 15:15 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:56 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 19:04 ` [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v1 00/11] locks: scalability improvements for file locking Davidlohr Bueso
2013-06-03 21:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 10:54 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 11:56 ` Jim Rees
2013-06-04 12:15 ` Jeff Layton
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=1370056054-25449-8-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).