From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] xfs: remove a superflous hash lookup when inserting new buffers
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:26:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220406162608.GB590@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220405220121.GZ1544202@dread.disaster.area>
On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 08:01:21AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Agreed, but you're making two distinct, significant modifications in
> the one patchset. One is changing the way we use a generic library
> functionality, the other is changing the entire structure of the
> lookup path.
>
> IOWs, I was not saying the end result was bad, I was (clumsily)
> trying to suggest that you should split these two modifications into
> separate patches because they are largely separate changes.
>
> Once I thought about it that way, and
> looking that them that way made me want to structure the code quite
> differently.
Ok, I'll see if I can split things up a bit better.
>
> e.g. Most of the complexity goes away if we factor out the buffer
> trylock/locking code into a helper (like we have in the iomap code)
> and then have xfs_buf_insert() call it when it finds an existing
> buffer. Then the -EEXIST return value can go away, and
> xfs_buf_insert can return a locked buffer exactly the same as if it
> inserted a new buffer. Have the newly allocated buffer take a new
> perag reference, too, instead of stealing the caller's reference,
> and then all the differences between insert and -EEXIST cases go
> away.
I actually had that earlier as well and really like the flow of
the single function. So it certainly is doable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-06 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-03 12:01 lockless and cleaned up buffer lookup Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 12:01 ` [PATCH 1/5] xfs: add a flags argument to xfs_buf_get Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 12:01 ` [PATCH 2/5] xfs: replace xfs_buf_incore with an XBF_NOALLOC flag to xfs_buf_get* Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 21:54 ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-05 14:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-05 21:21 ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-06 16:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 12:01 ` [PATCH 3/5] xfs: remove a superflous hash lookup when inserting new buffers Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 23:04 ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-05 15:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-05 22:01 ` Dave Chinner
2022-04-06 16:26 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2022-04-03 12:01 ` [PATCH 4/5] xfs: reduce the number of atomic when locking a buffer after lookup Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-03 12:01 ` [PATCH 5/5] xfs: lockless buffer lookup 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=20220406162608.GB590@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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