From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pB7GMTQr100977 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 10:22:30 -0600 Received: from mx2.suse.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 10C3016EC5F3 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 08:22:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id F4GQqQpDdp5ZJK1i for ; Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:22:24 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20111207161218.549789985@clark.kroah.org> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 08:11:48 -0800 From: Greg KH Subject: [046/104] xfs: dont serialise direct IO reads on page cache checks In-Reply-To: <20111207161246.GA10995@kroah.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com Cc: Alex Elder , xfs@oss.sgi.com, bpm@sgi.com, Dave Chinner , akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk 3.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Dave Chinner commit 0c38a2512df272b14ef4238b476a2e4f70da1479 upstream. There is no need to grab the i_mutex of the IO lock in exclusive mode if we don't need to invalidate the page cache. Taking these locks on every direct IO effective serialises them as taking the IO lock in exclusive mode has to wait for all shared holders to drop the lock. That only happens when IO is complete, so effective it prevents dispatch of concurrent direct IO reads to the same inode. Fix this by taking the IO lock shared to check the page cache state, and only then drop it and take the IO lock exclusively if there is work to be done. Hence for the normal direct IO case, no exclusive locking will occur. Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner Tested-by: Joern Engel Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig Signed-off-by: Alex Elder Cc: Ben Myers Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c @@ -317,7 +317,19 @@ xfs_file_aio_read( if (XFS_FORCED_SHUTDOWN(mp)) return -EIO; - if (unlikely(ioflags & IO_ISDIRECT)) { + /* + * Locking is a bit tricky here. If we take an exclusive lock + * for direct IO, we effectively serialise all new concurrent + * read IO to this file and block it behind IO that is currently in + * progress because IO in progress holds the IO lock shared. We only + * need to hold the lock exclusive to blow away the page cache, so + * only take lock exclusively if the page cache needs invalidation. + * This allows the normal direct IO case of no page cache pages to + * proceeed concurrently without serialisation. + */ + xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED); + if ((ioflags & IO_ISDIRECT) && inode->i_mapping->nrpages) { + xfs_rw_iunlock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED); xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL); if (inode->i_mapping->nrpages) { @@ -330,8 +342,7 @@ xfs_file_aio_read( } } xfs_rw_ilock_demote(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL); - } else - xfs_rw_ilock(ip, XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED); + } trace_xfs_file_read(ip, size, iocb->ki_pos, ioflags); _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs