From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Paul Moore <pmoore@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: avoid recopying file names in getname_flags
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 23:10:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150329151012.GB1477@fixme-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFLxGvzBgwA0UB6hdAetoBWwtE3DSf9PhH2MSj2jn6kddLCxwg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2785 bytes --]
Hi Richard,
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 12:13:29PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In the current implementation of getname_flags, a file name in the
> > user-space will be recopied if it takes more space that
> > EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX, however, at this moment, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX bytes of
> > the file name are already copied into kernel address space, the only
> > reason why the recopy is needed is that "kname", which points to the
> > string of the file name, needs to be relocated.
> >
> > And the recopy can be avoided if we change the memory layout of the
> > `names_cachep` allocation. By putting `struct filename` at the tail of
> > the allocation instead of the head, relocation of kname is avoided.
> > Once putting the struct at the tail, each byte in the user space will be
> > copied only one time, so the recopy is avoided.
> >
> > Of course, other functions aware of the layout of the `names_cachep`
> > allocation, i.e., getname_kernel and putname also need to be modified to
> > adapt to the new layout.
> >
> > Since we change the layout of `names_cachep` allocation, in order to
> > figure out whether kname and the struct are separate, we now need to
> > check whether the file name string starts at the address
> > EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX bytes before the address of the struct. As a result,
> > `iname`, which points the end of `struct filename`, is not needed
> > anymore.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > v1 --> v2:
> > Rebase the patch onto the for-next branch of Al's vfs repo.
> >
> >
> > fs/namei.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > include/linux/fs.h | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
> > index 7a11ec1..6d04029 100644
> > --- a/fs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/namei.c
> > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@
> > * PATH_MAX includes the nul terminator --RR.
> > */
> >
> > -#define EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX (PATH_MAX - offsetof(struct filename, iname))
> > +#define EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX (PATH_MAX - sizeof(struct filename))
>
> *confused*
> EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX is currently PATH_MAX - sizeof(struct filename)
>
> Did you mix original and new source while creating the patch?
This patch is based on branch 'for-next' in Al's tree, in that repo
commit b2ddab0e5324aec11620666eccc4f0ff64802131 ("kill struct filename.separate")
changes EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX to (PATH_MAX - offsetof(struct filename, iname))
I put the "based-on" information in the version changing log, seems it's
better to put it in the commit log to make it clearer for reviewers?
Thanks,
Boqun Feng
>
> --
> Thanks,
> //richard
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-29 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-25 18:45 [PATCH v2] vfs: avoid recopying file names in getname_flags Boqun Feng
2015-03-29 4:27 ` Boqun Feng
2015-03-29 10:14 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 15:23 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-07 8:38 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-11 23:56 ` Al Viro
2015-04-12 1:13 ` Al Viro
2015-04-13 7:34 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-17 12:35 ` Is it OK to export symbols 'getname' and 'putname'? Boqun Feng
2015-04-18 0:20 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-20 15:55 ` Jan Kara
2015-04-22 2:38 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-22 5:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-04-23 5:32 ` Boqun Feng
2015-04-13 6:33 ` [PATCH v2] vfs: avoid recopying file names in getname_flags Boqun Feng
2015-03-29 10:13 ` Richard Weinberger
2015-03-29 15:10 ` Boqun Feng [this message]
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=20150329151012.GB1477@fixme-laptop \
--to=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmoore@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.weinberger@gmail.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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