From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tsutomu Itoh Subject: Re: new metadata reader/writer locks in integration-test Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 17:36:09 +0900 Message-ID: <4E269379.20405@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <1311096438-sup-1263@shiny> <4E2638A6.2070404@jp.fujitsu.com> <1311148631-sup-9551@shiny> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linux-btrfs To: Chris Mason Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1311148631-sup-9551@shiny> List-ID: (2011/07/20 16:58), Chris Mason wrote: > Excerpts from Tsutomu Itoh's message of 2011-07-19 22:08:38 -0400: >> (2011/07/20 2:30), Chris Mason wrote: >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I've pushed out a new integration-test branch, and it includes a new >>> reader/writer locking scheme for the btree locks. >>> >>> We've seen a number of benchmarks dominated by contention on the root >>> node lock. This changes our locks into a simple reader/writer lock. >>> They are based on mutexes so that we still take advantage of the mutex >>> adaptive spins for write locks (rwsemaphores were much slower). >>> >>> I'm also sending the individual commits, please do take a look. >> >> I pulled the new integration-test branch, and I got the following >> warning messages. >> >> Jul 20 10:03:30 luna kernel: ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> Jul 20 10:03:30 luna kernel: WARNING: at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5704 btrfs_alloc_free_block+0x178/0x340 [btrfs]() > > Thanks, I think this one is related to Josef's enospc changes, but I'll > double check. >What was the test? I ran my original test script. This script concurrently executes the making deletion of a lot of files, and the making deletion of a big file, etc. Thanks, Tsutomu