From: "J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Q. hlist_bl_add_head_rcu() in d_alloc_parallel()
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 10:19:16 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20287.1466644756@jrobl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160620053530.GI14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Al Viro:
> That check is definitely bogus and I'm completely at loss as to WTF is it
> doing there. Thanks for catching that; this kind of idiotic braino can
> escape notice when rereading the code again and again, unfortunately ;-/
>
> Fixed, will push to Linus tonight or tomorrow.
Thank you too for fixing.
I've confirmed the patch was merged and it passed my local tests
too. Happy.
I have another and relatively less important suggestion. Since the two
groups tests in the loop are very similar, how about extract them as a
new single static function?
Do you think it will invite a performance down?
J. R. Okajima
diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
index 76afffd..3a9ebbc 100644
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -2462,14 +2462,42 @@ static void d_wait_lookup(struct dentry *dentry)
}
}
+/* tests for d_alloc_parallel() */
+static bool dap_test(struct dentry *dentry, const struct qstr *name,
+ struct dentry *parent, bool do_unhashed_test)
+{
+ bool ret;
+
+ ret = false;
+ if (dentry->d_name.hash != name->hash)
+ goto out;
+ if (dentry->d_parent != parent)
+ goto out;
+ if (do_unhashed_test && d_unhashed(dentry))
+ goto out;
+ if (parent->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_COMPARE) {
+ int tlen = dentry->d_name.len;
+ const char *tname = dentry->d_name.name;
+ if (parent->d_op->d_compare(parent, dentry, tlen, tname, name))
+ goto out;
+ } else {
+ unsigned int len = name->len;
+ if (dentry->d_name.len != len)
+ goto out;
+ if (dentry_cmp(dentry, name->name, len))
+ goto out;
+ }
+ ret = true;
+
+out:
+ return ret;
+}
+
struct dentry *d_alloc_parallel(struct dentry *parent,
const struct qstr *name,
wait_queue_head_t *wq)
{
- unsigned int len = name->len;
- unsigned int hash = name->hash;
- const unsigned char *str = name->name;
- struct hlist_bl_head *b = in_lookup_hash(parent, hash);
+ struct hlist_bl_head *b = in_lookup_hash(parent, name->hash);
struct hlist_bl_node *node;
struct dentry *new = d_alloc(parent, name);
struct dentry *dentry;
@@ -2515,21 +2543,8 @@ retry:
* we encounter.
*/
hlist_bl_for_each_entry(dentry, node, b, d_u.d_in_lookup_hash) {
- if (dentry->d_name.hash != hash)
- continue;
- if (dentry->d_parent != parent)
+ if (!dap_test(dentry, name, parent, /*do_unhashed_test*/false))
continue;
- if (parent->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_COMPARE) {
- int tlen = dentry->d_name.len;
- const char *tname = dentry->d_name.name;
- if (parent->d_op->d_compare(parent, dentry, tlen, tname, name))
- continue;
- } else {
- if (dentry->d_name.len != len)
- continue;
- if (dentry_cmp(dentry, str, len))
- continue;
- }
hlist_bl_unlock(b);
/* now we can try to grab a reference */
if (!lockref_get_not_dead(&dentry->d_lockref)) {
@@ -2550,23 +2565,9 @@ retry:
* d_lookup() would've found anyway. If it is, just return it;
* otherwise we really have to repeat the whole thing.
*/
- if (unlikely(dentry->d_name.hash != hash))
- goto mismatch;
- if (unlikely(dentry->d_parent != parent))
+ if (unlikely(!dap_test(dentry, name, parent,
+ /*do_unhashed_test*/true)))
goto mismatch;
- if (unlikely(d_unhashed(dentry)))
- goto mismatch;
- if (parent->d_flags & DCACHE_OP_COMPARE) {
- int tlen = dentry->d_name.len;
- const char *tname = dentry->d_name.name;
- if (parent->d_op->d_compare(parent, dentry, tlen, tname, name))
- goto mismatch;
- } else {
- if (unlikely(dentry->d_name.len != len))
- goto mismatch;
- if (unlikely(dentry_cmp(dentry, str, len)))
- goto mismatch;
- }
/* OK, it *is* a hashed match; return it */
spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
dput(new);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-23 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-17 20:50 Q. hlist_bl_add_head_rcu() in d_alloc_parallel() J. R. Okajima
2016-06-17 22:16 ` Al Viro
2016-06-17 22:56 ` Al Viro
2016-06-19 5:24 ` J. R. Okajima
2016-06-19 16:55 ` Al Viro
2016-06-20 4:34 ` J. R. Okajima
2016-06-20 5:35 ` Al Viro
2016-06-20 14:51 ` Al Viro
2016-06-20 17:14 ` [git pull] vfs fixes Al Viro
2016-06-23 1:19 ` J. R. Okajima [this message]
2016-06-23 2:58 ` Q. hlist_bl_add_head_rcu() in d_alloc_parallel() Al Viro
2016-06-24 5:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-25 22:54 ` Al Viro
2016-06-26 1:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-29 8:17 ` Al Viro
2016-06-29 9:22 ` Hekuang
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=20287.1466644756@jrobl \
--to=hooanon05g@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).