From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: npiggin@suse.de
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@google.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/52] kernel: add bl_list
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:37:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100628213739.GF2357@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100624030725.718438579@suse.de>
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:13PM +1000, npiggin@suse.de wrote:
> Introduce a type of hlist that can support the use of the lowest bit in the
> hlist_head. This will be subsequently used to implement per-bucket bit spinlock
> for inode and dentry hashes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Looks good! One question on non-RCU pointer poisoning and a typo.
When these are addressed (perhaps by showing me the error of my ways):
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> include/linux/list_bl.h | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/rculist_bl.h | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 219 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/list_bl.h
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/list_bl.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
> +#ifndef _LINUX_LIST_BL_H
> +#define _LINUX_LIST_BL_H
> +
> +#include <linux/list.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * Special version of lists, where head of the list has a bit spinlock
> + * in the lowest bit. This is useful for scalable hash tables without
> + * increasing memory footprint overhead.
> + */
> +
> +struct hlist_bl_head {
> + struct hlist_bl_node *first;
> +};
> +
> +struct hlist_bl_node {
> + struct hlist_bl_node *next, **pprev;
> +};
> +#define INIT_HLIST_BL_HEAD(ptr) \
> + ((ptr)->first = NULL)
> +
> +static inline void INIT_HLIST_BL_NODE(struct hlist_bl_node *h)
> +{
> + h->next = NULL;
> + h->pprev = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +#define hlist_bl_entry(ptr, type, member) container_of(ptr,type,member)
> +
> +static inline int hlist_bl_unhashed(const struct hlist_bl_node *h)
> +{
> + return !h->pprev;
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct hlist_bl_node *hlist_bl_first(struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> +{
> + return (struct hlist_bl_node *)((unsigned long)h->first & ~1UL);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void hlist_bl_set_first(struct hlist_bl_head *h, struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + h->first = (struct hlist_bl_node *)((unsigned long)n | ((unsigned long)h->first & 1UL));
> +}
> +
> +static inline int hlist_bl_empty(const struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> +{
> + return !((unsigned long)h->first & ~1UL);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void hlist_bl_add_head(struct hlist_bl_node *n,
> + struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> +{
> + struct hlist_bl_node *first = hlist_bl_first(h);
> +
> + n->next = first;
> + if (first)
> + first->pprev = &n->next;
> + n->pprev = &h->first;
> + hlist_bl_set_first(h, n);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void __hlist_bl_del(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + struct hlist_bl_node *next = n->next;
> + struct hlist_bl_node **pprev = n->pprev;
> + *pprev = (struct hlist_bl_node *)((unsigned long)next | ((unsigned long)*pprev & 1UL));
> + if (next)
> + next->pprev = pprev;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void hlist_bl_del(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + __hlist_bl_del(n);
> + n->pprev = LIST_POISON2;
OK, I'll bite... Why don't we poison the ->next pointer?
> +}
> +
> +static inline void hlist_bl_del_init(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + if (!hlist_bl_unhashed(n)) {
> + __hlist_bl_del(n);
> + INIT_HLIST_BL_NODE(n);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * hlist_bl_for_each_entry - iterate over list of given type
> + * @tpos: the type * to use as a loop cursor.
> + * @pos: the &struct hlist_node to use as a loop cursor.
> + * @head: the head for your list.
> + * @member: the name of the hlist_node within the struct.
> + *
> + */
> +#define hlist_bl_for_each_entry(tpos, pos, head, member) \
> + for (pos = hlist_bl_first(head); \
> + pos && \
> + ({ tpos = hlist_bl_entry(pos, typeof(*tpos), member); 1;}); \
> + pos = pos->next)
> +
> +#endif
> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/rculist_bl.h
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/rculist_bl.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
> +#ifndef _LINUX_RCULIST_BL_H
> +#define _LINUX_RCULIST_BL_H
> +
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +
> +/*
> + * RCU-protected list version
> + */
> +#include <linux/list_bl.h>
> +#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> +
> +static inline void hlist_bl_set_first_rcu(struct hlist_bl_head *h, struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + rcu_assign_pointer(h->first, (struct hlist_bl_node *)((unsigned long)n | ((unsigned long)h->first & 1UL)));
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct hlist_bl_node *hlist_bl_first_rcu(struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> +{
> + return (struct hlist_bl_node *)((unsigned long)rcu_dereference(h->first) & ~1UL);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * hlist_bl_del_init_rcu - deletes entry from hash list with re-initialization
> + * @n: the element to delete from the hash list.
> + *
> + * Note: hlist_bl_unhashed() on the node return true after this. It is
returns
> + * useful for RCU based read lockfree traversal if the writer side
> + * must know if the list entry is still hashed or already unhashed.
> + *
> + * In particular, it means that we can not poison the forward pointers
> + * that may still be used for walking the hash list and we can only
> + * zero the pprev pointer so list_unhashed() will return true after
> + * this.
> + *
> + * The caller must take whatever precautions are necessary (such as
> + * holding appropriate locks) to avoid racing with another
> + * list-mutation primitive, such as hlist_bl_add_head_rcu() or
> + * hlist_bl_del_rcu(), running on this same list. However, it is
> + * perfectly legal to run concurrently with the _rcu list-traversal
> + * primitives, such as hlist_bl_for_each_entry_rcu().
> + */
> +static inline void hlist_bl_del_init_rcu(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + if (!hlist_bl_unhashed(n)) {
> + __hlist_bl_del(n);
> + n->pprev = NULL;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * hlist_bl_del_rcu - deletes entry from hash list without re-initialization
> + * @n: the element to delete from the hash list.
> + *
> + * Note: hlist_bl_unhashed() on entry does not return true after this,
> + * the entry is in an undefined state. It is useful for RCU based
> + * lockfree traversal.
> + *
> + * In particular, it means that we can not poison the forward
> + * pointers that may still be used for walking the hash list.
> + *
> + * The caller must take whatever precautions are necessary
> + * (such as holding appropriate locks) to avoid racing
> + * with another list-mutation primitive, such as hlist_bl_add_head_rcu()
> + * or hlist_bl_del_rcu(), running on this same list.
> + * However, it is perfectly legal to run concurrently with
> + * the _rcu list-traversal primitives, such as
> + * hlist_bl_for_each_entry().
> + */
> +static inline void hlist_bl_del_rcu(struct hlist_bl_node *n)
> +{
> + __hlist_bl_del(n);
> + n->pprev = LIST_POISON2;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * hlist_bl_add_head_rcu
> + * @n: the element to add to the hash list.
> + * @h: the list to add to.
> + *
> + * Description:
> + * Adds the specified element to the specified hlist_bl,
> + * while permitting racing traversals.
> + *
> + * The caller must take whatever precautions are necessary
> + * (such as holding appropriate locks) to avoid racing
> + * with another list-mutation primitive, such as hlist_bl_add_head_rcu()
> + * or hlist_bl_del_rcu(), running on this same list.
> + * However, it is perfectly legal to run concurrently with
> + * the _rcu list-traversal primitives, such as
> + * hlist_bl_for_each_entry_rcu(), used to prevent memory-consistency
> + * problems on Alpha CPUs. Regardless of the type of CPU, the
> + * list-traversal primitive must be guarded by rcu_read_lock().
> + */
> +static inline void hlist_bl_add_head_rcu(struct hlist_bl_node *n,
> + struct hlist_bl_head *h)
> +{
> + struct hlist_bl_node *first = hlist_bl_first(h);
> +
> + n->next = first;
> + if (first)
> + first->pprev = &n->next;
> + n->pprev = &h->first;
> + hlist_bl_set_first_rcu(h, n);
> +}
> +/**
> + * hlist_bl_for_each_entry_rcu - iterate over rcu list of given type
> + * @tpos: the type * to use as a loop cursor.
> + * @pos: the &struct hlist_bl_node to use as a loop cursor.
> + * @head: the head for your list.
> + * @member: the name of the hlist_bl_node within the struct.
> + *
> + */
> +#define hlist_bl_for_each_entry_rcu(tpos, pos, head, member) \
> + for (pos = hlist_bl_first_rcu(head); \
> + pos && \
> + ({ tpos = hlist_bl_entry(pos, typeof(*tpos), member); 1; }); \
> + pos = rcu_dereference_raw(pos->next))
> +
> +#endif
> +#endif
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-28 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 153+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-24 3:02 [patch 00/52] vfs scalability patches updated npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 01/52] kernel: add bl_list npiggin
2010-06-24 6:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-24 14:42 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 16:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-28 21:37 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2010-06-29 6:30 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 02/52] fs: fix superblock iteration race npiggin
2010-06-29 13:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-29 14:56 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-29 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-29 17:41 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-29 17:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-29 17:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-06-29 20:04 ` Chris Clayton
2010-06-29 20:14 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-29 20:38 ` Chris Clayton
2010-06-30 7:13 ` Chris Clayton
2010-06-30 12:51 ` Al Viro
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 03/52] fs: fs_struct rwlock to spinlock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 04/52] fs: cleanup files_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 05/52] lglock: introduce special lglock and brlock spin locks npiggin
2010-06-24 18:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-06-25 6:22 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-25 9:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-06-25 10:11 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 06/52] fs: scale files_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 7:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 15:00 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 07/52] fs: brlock vfsmount_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 08/52] fs: scale mntget/mntput npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 09/52] fs: dcache scale hash npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 10/52] fs: dcache scale lru npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 11/52] fs: dcache scale nr_dentry npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 12/52] fs: dcache scale dentry refcount npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 13/52] fs: dcache scale d_unhashed npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 14/52] fs: dcache scale subdirs npiggin
2010-06-24 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 9:50 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 15:53 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 15/52] fs: dcache scale inode alias list npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 16/52] fs: dcache RCU for multi-step operaitons npiggin
2010-06-24 7:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 15:03 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 17:22 ` john stultz
2010-06-24 17:26 ` john stultz
2010-06-25 6:45 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 17/52] fs: dcache remove dcache_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 18/52] fs: dcache reduce dput locking npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 19/52] fs: dcache per-bucket dcache hash locking npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 20/52] fs: dcache reduce dcache_inode_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 21/52] fs: dcache per-inode inode alias locking npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 22/52] fs: dcache rationalise dget variants npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 23/52] fs: dcache percpu nr_dentry npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 24/52] fs: dcache reduce d_parent locking npiggin
2010-06-24 8:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 15:07 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 15:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-24 16:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 16:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-28 21:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-07-07 14:35 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 25/52] fs: dcache DCACHE_REFERENCED improve npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 26/52] fs: icache lock s_inodes list npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 27/52] fs: icache lock inode hash npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 28/52] fs: icache lock i_state npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 29/52] fs: icache lock i_count npiggin
2010-06-30 7:27 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 2:36 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-01 7:54 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 9:36 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 16:21 ` Frank Mayhar
2010-07-03 2:03 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-03 3:41 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-03 4:31 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-03 5:06 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-03 5:18 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-05 22:41 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-06 4:34 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-06 10:38 ` Theodore Tso
2010-07-06 13:04 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-07 17:00 ` Frank Mayhar
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 30/52] fs: icache lock lru/writeback lists npiggin
2010-06-24 8:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 15:09 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 15:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 31/52] fs: icache atomic inodes_stat npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 32/52] fs: icache protect inode state npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 33/52] fs: icache atomic last_ino, iunique lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 34/52] fs: icache remove inode_lock npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 35/52] fs: icache factor hash lock into functions npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 36/52] fs: icache per-bucket inode hash locks npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 37/52] fs: icache lazy lru npiggin
2010-06-24 9:52 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 15:59 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-30 8:38 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:06 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 2:46 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-01 7:57 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 38/52] fs: icache RCU free inodes npiggin
2010-06-30 8:57 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:07 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 39/52] fs: icache rcu walk for i_sb_list npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 40/52] fs: dcache improve scalability of pseudo filesystems npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 41/52] fs: icache reduce atomics npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 42/52] fs: icache per-cpu last_ino allocator npiggin
2010-06-24 9:48 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 15:52 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 16:19 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 16:38 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 43/52] fs: icache per-cpu nr_inodes counter npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 44/52] fs: icache per-CPU sb inode lists and locks npiggin
2010-06-30 9:26 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:08 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 3:12 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-01 8:00 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 45/52] fs: icache RCU hash lookups npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 46/52] fs: icache reduce locking npiggin
2010-06-24 3:02 ` [patch 47/52] fs: keep inode with backing-dev npiggin
2010-06-24 3:03 ` [patch 48/52] fs: icache split IO and LRU lists npiggin
2010-06-24 3:03 ` [patch 49/52] fs: icache scale writeback list locking npiggin
2010-06-24 3:03 ` [patch 50/52] mm: implement per-zone shrinker npiggin
2010-06-24 10:06 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 16:00 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 16:27 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 16:32 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-24 16:37 ` Andi Kleen
2010-06-30 6:28 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:03 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:03 ` [patch 51/52] fs: per-zone dentry and inode LRU npiggin
2010-06-30 10:09 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:13 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-24 3:03 ` [patch 52/52] fs: icache less I_FREEING time npiggin
2010-06-30 10:13 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:14 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 3:33 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-01 8:06 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-25 7:12 ` [patch 00/52] vfs scalability patches updated Christoph Hellwig
2010-06-25 8:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-30 11:30 ` Dave Chinner
2010-06-30 12:40 ` Nick Piggin
2010-06-30 17:09 ` Frank Mayhar
2010-07-01 3:56 ` Dave Chinner
2010-07-01 8:20 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 17:36 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-01 17:23 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 17:28 ` Andi Kleen
2010-07-06 17:49 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-01 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-07-01 17:52 ` Nick Piggin
2010-07-02 4:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-06-30 17:08 ` Frank Mayhar
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=20100628213739.GF2357@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=fmayhar@google.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/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).