From: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
To: jack@suse.cz, tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org,
riteshh@linux.ibm.com, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: [PATCHv4 1/3] ext4: fix ext4_dax_read/write inode locking sequence for IOCB_NOWAIT
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 12:16:22 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191205064624.13419-2-riteshh@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191205064624.13419-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
Apparently our current rwsem code doesn't like doing the trylock, then
lock for real scheme. So change our dax read/write methods to just do the
trylock for the RWF_NOWAIT case.
This seems to fix AIM7 regression in some scalable filesystems upto ~25%
in some cases. Claimed in commit 942491c9e6d6 ("xfs: fix AIM7 regression")
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Bobrowski <mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org>
Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com>
---
fs/ext4/file.c | 10 ++++++----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/ext4/file.c b/fs/ext4/file.c
index 6a7293a5cda2..977ac58dc718 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/file.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/file.c
@@ -88,9 +88,10 @@ static ssize_t ext4_dax_read_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
struct inode *inode = file_inode(iocb->ki_filp);
ssize_t ret;
- if (!inode_trylock_shared(inode)) {
- if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT)
+ if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT) {
+ if (!inode_trylock_shared(inode))
return -EAGAIN;
+ } else {
inode_lock_shared(inode);
}
/*
@@ -487,9 +488,10 @@ ext4_dax_write_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *from)
bool extend = false;
struct inode *inode = file_inode(iocb->ki_filp);
- if (!inode_trylock(inode)) {
- if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT)
+ if (iocb->ki_flags & IOCB_NOWAIT) {
+ if (!inode_trylock(inode))
return -EAGAIN;
+ } else {
inode_lock(inode);
}
--
2.21.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-05 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-05 6:46 [PATCHv4 0/3] Fix inode_lock sequence to scale performance of DIO mixed R/W workload Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 6:46 ` Ritesh Harjani [this message]
2019-12-05 6:46 ` [PATCHv4 2/3] ext4: Start with shared i_rwsem in case of DIO instead of exclusive Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 12:03 ` Jan Kara
2019-12-05 13:40 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 6:46 ` [PATCHv4 3/3] ext4: Move to shared i_rwsem even without dioread_nolock mount opt Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 12:05 ` Jan Kara
2019-12-05 13:41 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-05 13:46 ` Ritesh Harjani
2019-12-06 8:46 ` [PATCHv4 0/3] Fix inode_lock sequence to scale performance of DIO mixed R/W workload Joseph Qi
2019-12-06 8:49 ` Ritesh Harjani
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=20191205064624.13419-2-riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
--to=riteshh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbobrowski@mbobrowski.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).