From: Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: viro-RmSDqhL/yNMiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org,
matthew-Ztpu424NOJ8@public.gmane.org,
bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org
Cc: dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
sage-4GqslpFJ+cxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org,
smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
swhiteho-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
Trond.Myklebust-HgOvQuBEEgTQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-afs-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
samba-technical-w/Ol4Ecudpl8XjKLYN78aQ@public.gmane.org,
cluster-devel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
piastryyy-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
Subject: [PATCH v1 10/11] locks: add a new "lm_owner_key" lock operation
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 23:07:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1370056054-25449-11-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370056054-25449-1-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Currently, the hashing that the locking code uses to add these values
to the blocked_hash is simply calculated using fl_owner field. That's
valid in most cases except for server-side lockd, which validates the
owner of a lock based on fl_owner and fl_pid.
In the case where you have a small number of NFS clients doing a lot
of locking between different processes, you could end up with all
the blocked requests sitting in a very small number of hash buckets.
Add a new lm_owner_key operation to the lock_manager_operations that
will generate an unsigned long to use as the key in the hashtable.
That function is only implemented for server-side lockd, and simply
XORs the fl_owner and fl_pid.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
---
Documentation/filesystems/Locking | 18 +++++++++++-------
fs/lockd/svclock.c | 12 ++++++++++++
fs/locks.c | 13 ++++++++++---
include/linux/fs.h | 1 +
4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/Locking b/Documentation/filesystems/Locking
index 13f91ab..ee351ac 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/Locking
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/Locking
@@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ fl_release_private: maybe no
----------------------- lock_manager_operations ---------------------------
prototypes:
int (*lm_compare_owner)(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *);
+ unsigned long (*lm_owner_key)(struct file_lock *);
void (*lm_notify)(struct file_lock *); /* unblock callback */
int (*lm_grant)(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *, int);
void (*lm_break)(struct file_lock *); /* break_lease callback */
@@ -360,18 +361,21 @@ locking rules:
inode->i_lock file_lock_lock may block
lm_compare_owner: yes maybe no
+lm_owner_key yes yes no
lm_notify: yes no no
lm_grant: no no no
lm_break: yes no no
lm_change yes no no
- ->lm_compare_owner is generally called with *an* inode->i_lock
-held. It may not be the i_lock of the inode for either file_lock being
-compared! This is the case with deadlock detection, since the code has
-to chase down the owners of locks that may be entirely unrelated to the
-one on which the lock is being acquired. For deadlock detection however,
-the file_lock_lock is also held. The locks primarily ensure that neither
-file_lock disappear out from under you while doing the comparison.
+ ->lm_compare_owner and ->lm_owner_key are generally called with
+*an* inode->i_lock held. It may not be the i_lock of the inode
+associated with either file_lock argument! This is the case with deadlock
+detection, since the code has to chase down the owners of locks that may
+be entirely unrelated to the one on which the lock is being acquired.
+For deadlock detection however, the file_lock_lock is also held. The
+fact that these locks are held ensures that the file_locks do not
+disappear out from under you while doing the comparison or generating an
+owner key.
--------------------------- buffer_head -----------------------------------
prototypes:
diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
index e703318..ce2cdab 100644
--- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c
+++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c
@@ -744,8 +744,20 @@ static int nlmsvc_same_owner(struct file_lock *fl1, struct file_lock *fl2)
return fl1->fl_owner == fl2->fl_owner && fl1->fl_pid == fl2->fl_pid;
}
+/*
+ * Since NLM uses two "keys" for tracking locks, we need to hash them down
+ * to one for the blocked_hash. Here, we're just xor'ing the host address
+ * with the pid in order to create a key value for picking a hash bucket.
+ */
+static unsigned long
+nlmsvc_owner_key(struct file_lock *fl)
+{
+ return (unsigned long)fl->fl_owner ^ (unsigned long)fl->fl_pid;
+}
+
const struct lock_manager_operations nlmsvc_lock_operations = {
.lm_compare_owner = nlmsvc_same_owner,
+ .lm_owner_key = nlmsvc_owner_key,
.lm_notify = nlmsvc_notify_blocked,
.lm_grant = nlmsvc_grant_deferred,
};
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 0d030ce..8219187 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -491,13 +491,20 @@ static int posix_same_owner(struct file_lock *fl1, struct file_lock *fl2)
return fl1->fl_owner == fl2->fl_owner;
}
+static unsigned long
+posix_owner_key(struct file_lock *fl)
+{
+ if (fl->fl_lmops && fl->fl_lmops->lm_owner_key)
+ return fl->fl_lmops->lm_owner_key(fl);
+ return (unsigned long)fl->fl_owner;
+}
+
/* Remove a blocker or lock from one of the global lists */
static inline void
locks_insert_global_blocked(struct file_lock *waiter)
{
spin_lock(&file_lock_lock);
- hash_add(blocked_hash, &waiter->fl_link,
- (unsigned long)waiter->fl_owner);
+ hash_add(blocked_hash, &waiter->fl_link, posix_owner_key(waiter));
spin_unlock(&file_lock_lock);
}
@@ -716,7 +723,7 @@ static struct file_lock *what_owner_is_waiting_for(struct file_lock *block_fl)
{
struct file_lock *fl, *ret = NULL;
- hash_for_each_possible(blocked_hash, fl, fl_link, (unsigned long)block_fl->fl_owner) {
+ hash_for_each_possible(blocked_hash, fl, fl_link, posix_owner_key(block_fl)) {
if (posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl)) {
ret = fl->fl_next;
if (likely(ret))
diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h
index 07a009e..4906cf5 100644
--- a/include/linux/fs.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs.h
@@ -908,6 +908,7 @@ struct file_lock_operations {
struct lock_manager_operations {
int (*lm_compare_owner)(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *);
+ unsigned long (*lm_owner_key)(struct file_lock *);
void (*lm_notify)(struct file_lock *); /* unblock callback */
int (*lm_grant)(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *, int);
void (*lm_break)(struct file_lock *);
--
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 [PATCH v1 00/11] locks: scalability improvements for file locking Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 01/11] cifs: use posix_unblock_lock instead of locks_delete_block Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-2-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 02/11] locks: make generic_add_lease and generic_delete_lease static Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-3-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [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 ` [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 ` [PATCH v1 07/11] locks: only pull entries off of blocked_list when they are really unblocked Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-8-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 21:58 ` J. Bruce Fields
[not found] ` <20130604215839.GD15594-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-05 11:38 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <20130605073822.4d67c57c-4QP7MXygkU+dMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-05 12:24 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 12:38 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <20130605083859.72c855cd-4QP7MXygkU+dMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-05 12:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 08/11] locks: convert fl_link to a hlist_node Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-9-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 21:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <20130605074309.051ff75f-4QP7MXygkU+dMjc06nkz3ljfA9RmPOcC@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-05 12:46 ` J. Bruce Fields
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-1-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 03/11] locks: comment cleanups and clarifications Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-4-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-03 22:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
[not found] ` <20130603220024.GF2109-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 11:09 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 06/11] locks: convert to i_lock to protect i_flock list Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
[not found] ` <20130604212208.GC15594-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-05 0:46 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 09/11] locks: turn the blocked_list into a hashtable Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 11/11] locks: give the blocked_hash its own spinlock Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <1370056054-25449-12-git-send-email-jlayton-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 14:19 ` Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
2013-06-04 14:39 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
[not found] ` <20130604144640.GA7730-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
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 ` [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
[not found] ` <20130604065417.46080a57-9yPaYZwiELC+kQycOl6kW4xkIHaj4LzF@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-04 11:56 ` Jim Rees
[not found] ` <20130604115644.GA4180-63aXycvo3TyHXe+LvDLADg@public.gmane.org>
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=1370056054-25449-11-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com \
--to=jlayton-h+wxahxf7alqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust-HgOvQuBEEgTQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
--cc=bfields-uC3wQj2KruNg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cluster-devel-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-afs-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-cifs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-nfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matthew-Ztpu424NOJ8@public.gmane.org \
--cc=piastryyy-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=sage-4GqslpFJ+cxBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=samba-technical-w/Ol4Ecudpl8XjKLYN78aQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=smfrench-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=swhiteho-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=viro-RmSDqhL/yNMiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).