From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
ReiserFS Development List <reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>,
Alessio Igor Bogani <abogani@texware.it>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock on flush_commit_list()
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 15:29:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090501132923.GA30663@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241184385.13084.11.camel@think.oraclecorp.com>
* Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 15:13 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 07:42:47AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > flush_commit_list() uses ll_rw_block() to commit the pending log blocks.
> > > > ll_rw_block() might sleep, and the bkl was released at this point. Then
> > > > we can also relax the write lock at this point.
> > > >
> > > > [ Impact: release the reiserfs write lock when it is not needed ]
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
> > > > Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
> > > > Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c | 7 +++++--
> > > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/journal.c b/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > index 373d080..b1ebd5a 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > @@ -1120,8 +1120,11 @@ static int flush_commit_list(struct super_block *s,
> > > > SB_ONDISK_JOURNAL_SIZE(s);
> > > > tbh = journal_find_get_block(s, bn);
> > > > if (tbh) {
> > > > - if (buffer_dirty(tbh))
> > > > - ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh) ;
> > > > + if (buffer_dirty(tbh)) {
> > > > + reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > > > + ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh);
> > > > + reiserfs_write_lock(s);
> > > > + }
> > > > put_bh(tbh) ;
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > >
> > > there's 7 other instances of ll_rw_block():
> > >
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- spin_unlock(lock);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &bh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- spin_lock(lock);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- reiserfs_write_lock(s);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- /* read in the log blocks, memcpy to the corresponding real block */
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(READ, get_desc_trans_len(desc), log_blocks);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- for (i = 0; i < get_desc_trans_len(desc); i++) {
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- set_buffer_dirty(real_blocks[i]);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(SWRITE, 1, real_blocks + i);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- }
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- }
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(READ, j, bhlist);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- for (i = 1; i < j; i++)
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- if (!buffer_uptodate(bh[j]))
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c: ll_rw_block(READA, 1, bh + j);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- brelse(bh[j]);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- reada_blocks, reada_count);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c: ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &bh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(sb);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c-{
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c: ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)));
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > >
> > > in particular the second stree.c one and the super.c has a
> > > write-unlock straight before the lock-drop.
> > >
> > > I think the stree.c unlock could be moved to before the
> > > ll_rw_block() call straight away.
> >
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > The super.c one needs more care: first put &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s))
> > > into a local variable, then unlock the wite-lock, then call
> > > ll_rw_block(). (This is important because &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)) is
> > > global filesystem state that has to be read with the lock held.)
> >
> >
> > Indeed &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)) is a pointer to blocks that
> > reflect the state of the filesystem but it was already not
> > safe on the old code.
> >
>
> SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB isn't going to change. It gets set once during
> mount and will return the same buffer from then on.
Are we holding a permanent reference to it after the first read? If
yes then any bread done on an uptodate bh will return immediately
without scheduling.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-01 13:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-01 2:44 [PATCH 0/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs3: performance improvements, faster than Bkl based scheme Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 1/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release write lock on fs_changed() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 6:31 ` Andi Kleen
2009-05-01 13:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:44 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 14:01 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 14:14 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-02 1:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 2/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock before rescheduling on do_journal_end() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 7:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:31 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 22:20 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 3/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release write lock while rescheduling on prepare_for_delete_or_cut() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 4/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock inside get_neighbors() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:25 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:29 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 5/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock inside reiserfs_read_bitmap_block() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:19 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:30 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 2:44 ` [PATCH 6/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock on flush_commit_list() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 5:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:13 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 13:26 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 13:29 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-05-01 13:54 ` Chris Mason
2009-05-01 5:35 ` [PATCH 0/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs3: performance improvements, faster than Bkl based scheme Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 12:18 ` Thomas Meyer
2009-05-01 14:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-01 19:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-01 21:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-01 21:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-02 1:39 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=20090501132923.GA30663@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=a.beregalov@gmail.com \
--cc=abogani@texware.it \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jeffm@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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