linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Blunck" <jblunck@suse.de>
To: "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de>, pbadari@us.ibm.com
Cc: "Bharata B Rao" <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Jan Blunck" <j.blunck@tu-harburg.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/14] Introduce union stack
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 09:19:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4de7f8a60705150019q768b292al12c08a3a53c820e9@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0705142241070.9570@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>

On 5/14/07, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de> wrote:
>
> >+static inline void union_lock(struct dentry *dentry)
> >+{
> >+      if (unlikely(dentry && dentry->d_union)) {
> >+              struct union_info *ui = dentry->d_union;
> >+
> >+              UM_DEBUG_LOCK("\"%s\" locking %p (count=%d)\n",
> >+                            dentry->d_name.name, ui,
> >+                            atomic_read(&ui->u_count));
> >+              __union_lock(dentry->d_union);
> >+      }
> >+}
> >+
> >+static inline void union_unlock(struct dentry *dentry)
> >+{
> >+      if (unlikely(dentry && dentry->d_union)) {
> >+              struct union_info *ui = dentry->d_union;
> >+
> >+              UM_DEBUG_LOCK("\"%s\" unlocking %p (count=%d)\n",
> >+                            dentry->d_name.name, ui,
> >+                            atomic_read(&ui->u_count));
> >+              __union_unlock(dentry->d_union);
> >+      }
> >+}
>
> Do we really need the unlikely()? d_union may be a new feature,
> but it may very well be possible that someone puts the bigger
> part of his/her files under a union. And when d_unions get
> stable, people will probably begin making their root filesystem
> unioned for livecds, and then unlikely() will rather be a
> likely penalty. My stance: just
>         if (dentry != NULL && dentry->d_union != NULL)
> This also goes for union_trylock.

Good question. My intention was that since most of the union code
costs performance (stack traversal, readdir) I optimize for the normal
(not unified) case.

> >+static inline int union_trylock(struct dentry *dentry)
> >+{
> >+      int locked = 1;
> >+
> >+      if (unlikely(dentry && dentry->d_union)) {
> >+              UM_DEBUG_LOCK("\"%s\" try locking %p (count=%d)\n",
> >+                            dentry->d_name.name, dentry->d_union,
> >+                            atomic_read(&dentry->d_union->u_count));
> >+              BUG_ON(!atomic_read(&dentry->d_union->u_count));
> >+              locked = mutex_trylock(&dentry->d_union->u_mutex);
> >+              UM_DEBUG_LOCK("\"%s\" trylock %p %s\n", dentry->d_name.name,
> >+                            dentry->d_union,
> >+                            locked ? "succeeded" : "failed");
> >+      }
> >+      return (locked ? 1 : 0);
> >+}
>
>         return locked ? 1 : 0
> or even
>         return !!locked;
> or since we're just passing up from mutex_trylock:
>         return locked;
> ?

Ahh, this seems to be a left-over of the semaphore -> mutex conversion.

> >+/*
> >+ * This is a *I can't get no sleep* helper
>
> More commonly known as "insomnia". :)
>

:)


Before I forget this: thank you (and Badari) for reviewing the patches!

Cheers,
Jan

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-15  7:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-14  9:37 [RFC][PATCH 0/14] VFS based Union Mount(v1) Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/14] Add union mount documentation Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/14] Add a new mount flag (MNT_UNION) for union mount Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 20:38   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-15  8:16     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-15 12:06       ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2007-05-15 12:53         ` Jan Blunck
2007-05-14  9:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/14] Add the whiteout file type Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 20:39   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-15  6:00     ` Jan Blunck
2007-05-14  9:40 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/14] Add config options for union mount Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:40 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/14] Introduce union stack Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 20:23   ` Badari Pulavarty
2007-05-14 20:51     ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-19 10:18     ` Paul Dickson
2007-05-22 16:35       ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-23 13:25       ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-05-14 20:48   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-15  7:19     ` Jan Blunck [this message]
2007-05-14 22:40   ` Badari Pulavarty
2007-05-15  6:28     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/14] Union-mount dentry reference counting Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 20:57   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-14  9:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/14] Union-mount mounting Bharata B Rao
2007-05-15  7:29   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-16  5:04     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:42 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/14] Union-mount lookup Bharata B Rao
2007-05-15  7:57   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-16  5:08     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-16 19:28       ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-16 20:06         ` Serge E. Hallyn
2007-05-15 14:00   ` Trond Myklebust
2007-05-18 11:05     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:42 ` [RFC][PATCH 9/14] Union-mount readdir Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 10:43   ` Carsten Otte
2007-05-14 11:15     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:43 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/14] In-kernel file copy between union mounted filesystems Bharata B Rao
2007-05-16  7:57   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-18 11:10     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-18 13:47       ` Shaya Potter
2007-05-22  3:13         ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-22  6:25           ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-22  8:38             ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-22 12:35               ` Shaya Potter
2007-05-23 10:41                 ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14  9:43 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/14] VFS whiteout handling Bharata B Rao
2007-05-16  8:06   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-14  9:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 12/14] ext2 whiteout support Bharata B Rao
2007-05-16  8:07   ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-05-14  9:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 13/14] ext3 " Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 20:16   ` Badari Pulavarty
2007-05-15  6:26     ` Bharata B Rao
2007-05-15  8:31       ` Jan Blunck
2007-05-14 20:17   ` Andreas Dilger
2007-05-14 20:35     ` Jan Blunck
2007-05-15 14:28       ` Theodore Tso
2007-05-14  9:45 ` [RFC][PATCH 14/14] tmpfs " Bharata B Rao
2007-05-14 16:13   ` Hugh Dickins
2007-05-14 19:20     ` Jan Blunck
2007-05-14 19:35       ` Hugh Dickins

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=4de7f8a60705150019q768b292al12c08a3a53c820e9@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jblunck@suse.de \
    --cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=j.blunck@tu-harburg.de \
    --cc=jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbadari@us.ibm.com \
    /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).