From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@kernel.org>,
Anna Schumaker <anna@kernel.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>, Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/19] Prepare to lift lookup out of exclusive lock for directory ops
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 04:47:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260427034701.GS3518998@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260427033527.773006-1-neilb@ownmail.net>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 01:29:33PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> This patch set progresses my effort to improve concurrency of
> directory operations and specifically to allow concurrent updates
> in a given directory.
>
> It is a selection of patches from the 53-patch set I posted in March
> which got relatively little response. Maybe a shorter set will be more
> approachable.
Got it, will post a review tomorrow.
> This set:
> - prepares the VFS in various ways
> - make use of these preparations in ovl and NFS (the most challenging
> filesystems for lookup as they do the most interesting things)
> - make use in efivars and shmem which for different reasons need a small
> change that seemed worth including here.
>
> The goal that these patch work towards is moving lookup out of i_rwsem
> on the directory - except for the actual ->lookup call. This is itself
> a step towards allowing broad concurrency of operations in a given
> directory.
>
> There are two particular requirements before lookup can move outside the lock:
> 1/ d_drop() mustn't be used before an operation completes: the dentry being present
> in the dcache becomes part of the locking protocol. This in turn requires
> d_splice_alias() to work with hashed negative dentries.
> 2/ d_alloc_parallel() mustn't be called while i_rw_sem is held, as this would
> result in a lock inversion. So d_alloc_noblock and others are introduced
> to handle the various cases.
> In a few cases we need to drop and re-take i_rw_sem inside ->lookup.
> As lookup might be called with a shared or exclusive lock this requires
> a new LOOKUP_SHARED flag which is ugly but can be removed after the
> lookup is moved out of the lock (then ->lookup will only ever be called
> with a shared lock).
>
> The full set of patches including these 19 and the rest to complete the
> lifting of lookup out of the exclusive lock can be found at
> github/neilbrown/linux in branch pdirops
>
> Significant changes since last time are:
> - use wait_var_event for d_alloc_parallel() rather than effectively
> duplicating that infrastructure - as suggested by Christop
> - changes to ovl_readdir handling as discussed with Amir.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
>
> [PATCH v2 01/19] VFS: fix various typos in documentation for
> [PATCH v2 02/19] VFS: enhance d_splice_alias() to handle in-lookup
> [PATCH v2 03/19] VFS: allow d_alloc_name() to be used with ->d_hash
> [PATCH v2 04/19] VFS: use wait_var_event for waiting in
> [PATCH v2 05/19] VFS: introduce d_alloc_noblock()
> [PATCH v2 06/19] VFS: add d_duplicate()
> [PATCH v2 07/19] VFS: Add LOOKUP_SHARED flag.
> [PATCH v2 08/19] VFS/xfs/ntfs: drop parent lock across
> [PATCH v2 09/19] ovl: stop using lookup_one() in iterate_shared()
> [PATCH v2 10/19] VFS/ovl: add d_alloc_noblock_return()
> [PATCH v2 11/19] efivarfs: use d_alloc_name()
> [PATCH v2 12/19] shmem: use d_duplicate()
> [PATCH v2 13/19] nfs: remove d_drop()/d_alloc_parallel() from
> [PATCH v2 14/19] nfs: use d_splice_alias() in nfs_link()
> [PATCH v2 15/19] nfs: don't d_drop() before d_splice_alias()
> [PATCH v2 16/19] nfs: don't d_drop() before d_splice_alias() in
> [PATCH v2 17/19] nfs: Use d_alloc_noblock() in nfs_prime_dcache()
> [PATCH v2 18/19] nfs: use d_alloc_noblock() in silly-rename
> [PATCH v2 19/19] nfs: use d_duplicate()
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-27 3:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-27 3:29 [PATCH v2 00/19] Prepare to lift lookup out of exclusive lock for directory ops NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 01/19] VFS: fix various typos in documentation for start_creating start_removing etc NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 02/19] VFS: enhance d_splice_alias() to handle in-lookup dentries NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 03/19] VFS: allow d_alloc_name() to be used with ->d_hash NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 04/19] VFS: use wait_var_event for waiting in d_alloc_parallel() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 05/19] VFS: introduce d_alloc_noblock() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 06/19] VFS: add d_duplicate() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 07/19] VFS: Add LOOKUP_SHARED flag NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 08/19] VFS/xfs/ntfs: drop parent lock across d_alloc_parallel() in d_add_ci() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 09/19] ovl: stop using lookup_one() in iterate_shared() handling NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 10/19] VFS/ovl: add d_alloc_noblock_return() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 11/19] efivarfs: use d_alloc_name() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 12/19] shmem: use d_duplicate() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 13/19] nfs: remove d_drop()/d_alloc_parallel() from nfs_atomic_open() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 14/19] nfs: use d_splice_alias() in nfs_link() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 15/19] nfs: don't d_drop() before d_splice_alias() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 16/19] nfs: don't d_drop() before d_splice_alias() in atomic_create NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 17/19] nfs: Use d_alloc_noblock() in nfs_prime_dcache() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 18/19] nfs: use d_alloc_noblock() in silly-rename NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:29 ` [PATCH v2 19/19] nfs: use d_duplicate() NeilBrown
2026-04-27 3:47 ` Al Viro [this message]
2026-04-27 8:41 ` [syzbot ci] Re: Prepare to lift lookup out of exclusive lock for directory ops syzbot ci
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=20260427034701.GS3518998@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jk@ozlabs.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=trondmy@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