From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Tao Ma <tm@tao.ma>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Check io list state and avoid an unnecessary mutex_lock in ext4_end_io_work.
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:02:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111031150206.GC16825@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4EAD01C1.1060002@tao.ma>
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 03:50:25PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
> sorry, but I thought I had considered this case.
> There are 2 callers. One is ext4_end_io_work(which has the bug I pointed
> out), the other is ext4_flush_complete_IO which has already done the
> check before calling ext4_end_io_nolock. And that's the reason why I
> move the check from ext4_end_io_nolock to ext4_end_io_work. So for the
> ext4_flush_complete_IO case, your new patch will spin_lock twice for the
> checking. Do I miss something here?
Ah, you're right; my mistake. When I looked closely, though, I found
that ext4_flush_completed_IO() had a call to list_empty() without
taking the spinlock, which would also be problematic. When I looked
more closely, I found more ways to optimize things, which also close
up a few potential (I think theoretical) race conditions.
Let me know what you think....
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-31 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-14 8:33 [PATCH] ext4: Check io list state and avoid an unnecessary mutex_lock in ext4_end_io_work Tao Ma
2011-10-29 20:57 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-10-30 7:50 ` Tao Ma
2011-10-31 15:02 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2011-10-31 15:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Use correct locking for ext4_end_io_nolock() Theodore Ts'o
2011-10-31 15:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] ext4: remove unnecessary call to waitqueue_active() Theodore Ts'o
2011-10-31 15:02 ` [PATCH 3/3] ext4: optimize locking for end_io extent conversion Theodore Ts'o
2011-11-01 2:51 ` Tao Ma
2011-11-01 10:30 ` Theodore Tso
2011-10-31 15:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] ext4: Use correct locking for ext4_end_io_nolock() Tao Ma
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=20111031150206.GC16825@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tm@tao.ma \
/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).