From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/28] [rfc] dcache scaling part 1
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:56:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877hgcrzgd.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101116140900.039761100@kernel.dk> (Nick Piggin's message of "Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:09:00 +1100")
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> writes:
> There are 3 main parts to dcache scaling. This one primarily adds new locks
> to take over dcache_lock, and some pre/post prep and streamlining patches.
>
> The second implements fine grained locking, and is rather trivial after
> part 1.
>
> The third implements rcu-walk. rcu-walk depends on the first part, because it
> relies on using d_lock to protect the state of the dentry (when converting from
> rcu-walk to refcounted walk). Without the fine grained locing, we'd need to use
> dcache_lock for that, which would be a step backwards to put into path walking
> again.
>
> Comments?
I read 15, 10, 8, 5, 4, 3, 1 so far (weird order, it showed that way in
my reader :-) There was nothing surprising in any of those and they all
seem to do what the description advertises.
I was scared a bit by the upto 4 level dcache lock nestings, but I
assume those will get better again when everything is done.
At least from a quick look they seem to be all in the right order
(I assume you attempted some runtime coverage with lockdep too, right?)
For some of the hash lists it may become attractive to consider
the newly posted lockless list, but it wasn't fully clear
if that was easy to do (the lock protected a bit more than
just the list node)
For the level file system tree sweep changes it would be nice
if there were semantic patches available. That would make
it easier to verify the changes have been consistently
done, by rerunning the patcher.
You can add a Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
to the patches listed above.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-17 10:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-16 14:09 [patch 00/28] [rfc] dcache scaling part 1 Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 01/28] fs: d_validate fixes Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 10:44 ` Andi Kleen
2010-11-18 20:51 ` David Miller
2010-11-18 20:59 ` David Miller
2010-11-19 5:05 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-19 5:01 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 02/28] kernel: kmem_ptr_validate considered harmful Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 03/28] fs: dcache documentation cleanup Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 04/28] fs: change d_delete semantics Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 0:16 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 05/28] cifs: dont overwrite dentry name in d_revalidate Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 06/28] jfs: " Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 07/28] fs: change d_compare for rcu-walk Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 0:44 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 08/28] fs: change d_hash " Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 0:50 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 09/28] hostfs: simplify locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 10/28] fs: dcache scale hash Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 11/28] fs: dcache scale lru Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 12/28] fs: dcache scale dentry refcount Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 13/28] fs: dcache scale d_unhashed Nick Piggin
2010-11-19 19:41 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 14/28] fs: dcache scale subdirs Nick Piggin
2010-11-19 19:41 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 15/28] fs: scale inode alias list Nick Piggin
2010-11-19 19:41 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 16/28] fs: Use rename lock and RCU for multi-step operations Nick Piggin
2010-11-19 19:42 ` Tim Pepper
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 17/28] fs: increase d_name lock coverage Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 18/28] fs: dcache remove dcache_lock Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 19/28] fs: dcache avoid starvation in dcache multi-step operations Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 20/28] fs: dcache reduce dput locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 21/28] fs: dcache reduce locking in d_alloc Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 22/28] fs: dcache reduce dcache_inode_lock Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 23/28] fs: dcache rationalise dget variants Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 24/28] fs: dcache reduce d_parent locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 25/28] fs: dcache reduce prune_one_dentry locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 26/28] fs: reduce dcache_inode_lock width in lru scanning Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 27/28] fs: use RCU in shrink_dentry_list to reduce lock nesting Nick Piggin
2010-11-16 14:09 ` [patch 28/28] fs: consolidate dentry kill sequence Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 2:12 ` [patch 00/28] [rfc] dcache scaling part 1 Dave Chinner
2010-11-17 10:56 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2010-11-17 11:19 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-17 12:01 ` Andi Kleen
2010-11-19 19:43 ` Tim Pepper
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=877hgcrzgd.fsf@basil.nowhere.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
/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