From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] xfs: replace i_flock with a sleeping bitlock
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:42:06 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111019004206.GB21338@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111018201405.357001594@bombadil.infradead.org>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:13:06PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> We almost never block on i_flock, the exception is synchronous inode
> flushing. Instead of bloating the inode with a 16/24-byte completion
> that we abuse as a semaphore just implement it as a bitlock that uses
> a bit waitqueue for the rare sleeping path. This primarily is a
> tradeoff between a much smaller inode and a faster non-blocking
> path vs a faster faster wakeups, and we are much better off with
> the former.
>
> A small downside is that we will lose lockdep checking for i_flock, but
> given that it's always taken inside the ilock that should be acceptable.
>
> Note that for example the inode writeback locking is implemented in a
> very similar way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
.....
> @@ -716,3 +716,19 @@ xfs_isilocked(
> return 0;
> }
> #endif
> +
> +void
> +__xfs_iflock(
> + struct xfs_inode *ip)
> +{
> + wait_queue_head_t *wq = bit_waitqueue(&ip->i_flags, __XFS_IFLOCK);
> + DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &ip->i_flags, __XFS_IFLOCK);
> +
> + do {
> + prepare_to_wait_exclusive(wq, &wait.wait, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> + if (xfs_isiflocked(ip))
> + schedule();
> + } while (!xfs_iflock_nowait(ip));
> +
> + finish_wait(wq, &wait.wait);
> +}
Given that the only way that the inode will become unlocked is for
IO to complete, that makes this an IO wait, right? Perhaps this
should call io_schedule() in that case?
> @@ -380,6 +372,8 @@ static inline void xfs_ifunlock(xfs_inod
> #define XFS_IFILESTREAM 0x0010 /* inode is in a filestream directory */
> #define XFS_ITRUNCATED 0x0020 /* truncated down so flush-on-close */
> #define XFS_IDIRTY_RELEASE 0x0040 /* dirty release already seen */
> +#define __XFS_IFLOCK 8 /* inode is beeing flushed right now */
> +#define XFS_IFLOCK (1 << __XFS_IFLOCK)
Any reason for leaving a gap in the flag space here?
Otherwise looks good.
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-19 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-18 20:13 [PATCH 0/4] inode diet, part1 Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-18 20:13 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs: make i_flags and unsigned long Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-19 0:30 ` Dave Chinner
2011-10-19 8:57 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-18 20:13 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs: replace i_flock with a sleeping bitlock Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-19 0:42 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-10-19 9:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-18 20:13 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs: replace i_pin_wait with a bit waitqueue Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-19 0:50 ` Dave Chinner
2011-10-18 20:13 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: remove the unused dm_attrs structure Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-19 0:50 ` Dave Chinner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-10-19 18:23 [PATCH 0/4] inode diet, part1 V2 Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-19 18:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs: replace i_flock with a sleeping bitlock Christoph Hellwig
2011-10-26 21:07 ` Alex Elder
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=20111019004206.GB21338@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--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