From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] xfs: Pull EFI/EFD handling out from under the AIL lock
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:17:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101130201734.GA16079@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1290993152-20999-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
- xfs_efi_init needs to initialize efi_next_extent using ATOMIC_INIT
- there is a behaviour change about the xfs_trans_del_item call
in xfs_efi_item_unpin - before it was protected by the
XFS_EFI_CANCELED which was never set, and now it's not.
- what happened to XFS_EFI_RECOVERED? You changed it to be indexed
for the atomic bit-ops, but it's still used non-atomic in the log
recovery code.
- Why is XFS_EFI_COMMITTED cleared in xlog_recover_do_efi_trans,
where it can't ever be set?
- can you please add a shared helper for xfs_efi_item_unpin and
xfs_efi_release, ala:
STATIC void
__xfs_efi_release(
xfs_efi_log_item_t *efip)
{
if (!test_and_clear_bit(XFS_EFI_COMMITTED, &efip->efi_flags)) {
struct xfs_ail *ailp = efip->efi_item.li_ailp;
spin_lock(&ailp->xa_lock);
/* xfs_trans_ail_delete() drops the AIL lock. */
xfs_trans_ail_delete(ailp, &efip->efi_item);
xfs_efi_item_free(efip);
}
so that it's obvious they do the same release operation?
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-30 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-29 1:12 [PATCH 0/8] xfs: AIL lock contention reduction V2 Dave Chinner
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 1/8] xfs: Pull EFI/EFD handling out from under the AIL lock Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 20:17 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2010-12-02 1:28 ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-02 11:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-12-03 5:24 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 2/8] xfs: clean up xfs_ail_delete() Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 20:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 3/8] xfs: bulk AIL insertion during transaction commit Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 22:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-12-02 1:32 ` Dave Chinner
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 4/8] xfs: reduce the number of AIL push wakeups Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 20:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 5/8] xfs: consume iodone callback items on buffers as they are processed Dave Chinner
2010-11-30 20:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 6/8] xfs: remove all the inodes on a buffer from the AIL in bulk Dave Chinner
2010-12-06 14:33 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-12-07 3:44 ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-07 7:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-11-29 1:12 ` [PATCH 8/8] xfs: use AIL bulk delete function to implement single delete Dave Chinner
2010-12-06 14:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20101130201734.GA16079@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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