From: Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: efficient access to "rotational"; new fcntl?
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:31:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vdjgqcbd.fsf@meyering.net> (raw)
About a year ago, I fixed GNU rm to avoid quadratic readdir/stat seek
penalties on ext3 and ext4 that became overwhelming on directories with
many entries (1M entries started to look like infloop or DoS).
From coreutils-7.0 NEWS:
chgrp, chmod, chown, chcon, du, rm: now all display linear performance,
even when operating on million-entry directories on ext3 and ext4 file
systems. Before, they would exhibit O(N^2) performance, due to linear
per-entry seek time cost when operating on entries in readdir order.
Rm was improved directly, while the others inherit the improvement
from the newer version of fts in gnulib.
To do that efficiently, I changed the core readdir loop (mainly via
gnulib's fts.c) to preprocess entries, when needed, by sorting them
on inode, and *then* processing them. This optimization is enabled
only when the affected file system is of a type likely to benefit,
and when the number of directory entries is large enough to matter.
However, with e.g., an ext4 partition on non-rotational hardware like
an SSD, that preprocessing is unnecessary and in fact wasted effort.
I'd like to avoid the waste by querying the equivalent of
/sys/.../rotational, via a syscall like fcntl or statvfs,
given a file descriptor.
Is there an efficient way to get that single bit?
IMHO, locating and opening-then-reading a file like
/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1f.2/host4/target4:0:0/4:0:0:0/block/sdc/queue/rotational
is not appropriate in the context of a low-level library function like fts.
Jim
next reply other threads:[~2009-09-18 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-18 19:31 Jim Meyering [this message]
2009-09-18 22:16 ` efficient access to "rotational"; new fcntl? Theodore Tso
2009-09-19 8:01 ` Jim Meyering
2009-09-19 8:31 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-09-19 9:07 ` Jim Meyering
2009-09-19 9:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-09-19 11:11 ` Avi Kivity
2009-09-19 11:30 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-09-19 11:40 ` Avi Kivity
2009-09-19 11:25 ` Willy Tarreau
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=87vdjgqcbd.fsf@meyering.net \
--to=jim@meyering.net \
--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