From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] conditionalize some boring buffer_head checks
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 03:43:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <407CEB91.1080503@pobox.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]
These checks are executed billions of times per day, with no stack dump
bug reports sent to lkml. Arguably, they will only trigger on buggy
filesystems (programmer error), and thus IMO shouldn't even be executed
in a non-debug kernel.
Even though BUG_ON() includes unlikely(), I think this patch -- or
something like it -- is preferable. The buffer_error() checks aren't
even marked unlikely().
This is a micro-optimization on a key kernel fast path.
[-- Attachment #2: patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 849 bytes --]
===== fs/buffer.c 1.237 vs edited =====
--- 1.237/fs/buffer.c Wed Apr 14 03:18:09 2004
+++ edited/fs/buffer.c Wed Apr 14 03:39:15 2004
@@ -2688,6 +2688,7 @@
{
struct bio *bio;
+#ifdef BH_DEBUG
BUG_ON(!buffer_locked(bh));
BUG_ON(!buffer_mapped(bh));
BUG_ON(!bh->b_end_io);
@@ -2698,6 +2699,7 @@
buffer_error();
if (rw == READ && buffer_dirty(bh))
buffer_error();
+#endif
/* Only clear out a write error when rewriting */
if (test_set_buffer_req(bh) && rw == WRITE)
===== include/linux/buffer_head.h 1.47 vs edited =====
--- 1.47/include/linux/buffer_head.h Wed Apr 14 03:18:09 2004
+++ edited/include/linux/buffer_head.h Wed Apr 14 03:39:31 2004
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@
#include <linux/wait.h>
#include <asm/atomic.h>
+#undef BH_DEBUG
+
enum bh_state_bits {
BH_Uptodate, /* Contains valid data */
BH_Dirty, /* Is dirty */
next reply other threads:[~2004-04-14 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-14 7:43 Jeff Garzik [this message]
2004-04-14 7:58 ` [PATCH] conditionalize some boring buffer_head checks Andrew Morton
2004-04-14 8:02 ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-14 8:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 8:16 ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-14 8:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 9:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 21:25 ` Matt Mackall
2004-04-14 21:27 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-04-14 21:37 ` Matt Mackall
2004-04-14 21:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 21:49 ` Matt Mackall
2004-04-15 6:12 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-04-15 20:52 ` PATCH] Kconfig.debug family Randy.Dunlap
2004-04-15 21:36 ` Sam Ravnborg
2004-04-15 21:36 ` Marc-Christian Petersen
2004-04-15 21:41 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-04-14 8:27 ` [PATCH] conditionalize some boring buffer_head checks Tim Hockin
2004-04-14 8:48 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 13:31 ` Chris Friesen
2004-04-14 15:05 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-04-14 8:29 ` Jens Axboe
2004-04-14 8:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-04-14 8:47 ` Jens Axboe
[not found] <1KNjN-gZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1KNDc-Bv-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1KNDg-Bv-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1KNMQ-Hs-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <1KNWA-OH-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-04-14 12:14 ` Andi Kleen
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=407CEB91.1080503@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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