From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: btrfs_tree_lock & trylock
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:10:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080908111059.GA8902@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
I did some btrfs RTFS over the weeking and I have a hard time understanding
what this code is attempting to do:
28 int btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
29 {
30 int i;
31
32 if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex))
33 return 0;
34 for (i = 0; i < 512; i++) {
35 cpu_relax();
36 if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex))
37 return 0;
38 }
39 cpu_relax();
40 mutex_lock_nested(&eb->mutex, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - btrfs_header_level(e b));
41 return 0;
42 }
The trylocks seem pretty pointless.
I presume it can be all replaced with the mutex_lock_nested() in line 40.
Also the return value seems pointless because noone checks it. Like
in the appended patch. Or do I miss something?
---
Remove unneeded trylocking and unused return value in btrfs_tree_lock
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
diff -r 417d87e57364 locking.c
--- a/locking.c Wed Aug 20 13:39:41 2008 -0400
+++ b/locking.c Mon Sep 08 13:09:21 2008 +0200
@@ -25,20 +25,9 @@
#include "extent_io.h"
#include "locking.h"
-int btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
+void btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
{
- int i;
-
- if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex))
- return 0;
- for (i = 0; i < 512; i++) {
- cpu_relax();
- if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex))
- return 0;
- }
- cpu_relax();
mutex_lock_nested(&eb->mutex, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - btrfs_header_level(eb));
- return 0;
}
int btrfs_try_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb)
diff -r 417d87e57364 locking.h
--- a/locking.h Wed Aug 20 13:39:41 2008 -0400
+++ b/locking.h Mon Sep 08 13:09:21 2008 +0200
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
#ifndef __BTRFS_LOCKING_
#define __BTRFS_LOCKING_
-int btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
+void btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
int btrfs_tree_unlock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
int btrfs_tree_locked(struct extent_buffer *eb);
int btrfs_try_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
--
ak@linux.intel.com
next reply other threads:[~2008-09-08 11:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-08 11:10 Andi Kleen [this message]
2008-09-08 13:47 ` btrfs_tree_lock & trylock Chris Mason
2008-09-08 13:54 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-08 14:02 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-08 14:20 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-08 15:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-09-08 15:28 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-08 23:26 ` Steve Long
2008-09-08 15:47 ` Andi Kleen
2008-09-08 15:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-09-08 15:55 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-08 16:13 ` jim owens
2008-09-08 16:20 ` Chris Mason
2008-09-08 16:49 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-09-08 17:17 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-09-08 17:32 ` Ric Wheeler
2008-09-08 23:28 ` Steve Long
2008-09-08 17:16 ` adaptive mutexes, was " Christoph Hellwig
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=20080908111059.GA8902@basil.nowhere.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox