From: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
To: Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: 9pfs: scope of rename_lock?
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 13:59:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210521135947.6ea005e5@bahia.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3386244.1hTsTelUFx@silver>
On Sun, 16 May 2021 19:06:44 +0200
Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> while reviewing the 9p code base for further optimizations, I stumbled over
> the 'rename_lock' introduced by 02cb7f3a2 and wondered about what exactly it
> shall protect?
>
> As far as I understand it, the original intention at introduction
> (aforementioned 02cb7f3a2) was to protect
>
> 1. fidp->path variable
>
> and
>
> 2. *ANY* filesystem path from being renamed during the *entire* duration
> of some concurrent 9p operation.
>
> So because of (2.) it was introduced as a global lock. But (2.) is a dead end
> approach anyway, isn't it?
>
I agree that this looks terrible.
> Therefore my question: rename_lock is currently a global lock. Wouldn't it
> make more sense to transform it from a global lock from struct V9fsState ->
> struct V9fsFidState and just let it protect that fidp->path variable locally
> there?
>
Nothing comes to the top of my mind right now... Maybe Aneesh (Cc'd) can shed
some light on:
commit 02cb7f3a256517cbf3136caff2863fbafc57b540
Author: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue May 24 15:10:56 2011 +0530
hw/9pfs: Use read-write lock for protecting fid path.
On rename we take the write lock and this ensure path
doesn't change as we operate on them.
Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Why are we serializing all operations on all fid paths with a single
global lock ?
> Best regards,
> Christian Schoenebeck
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 12:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-16 17:06 9pfs: scope of rename_lock? Christian Schoenebeck
2021-05-21 11:59 ` Greg Kurz [this message]
2021-05-25 11:41 ` Christian Schoenebeck
2021-05-26 13:41 ` Christian Schoenebeck
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=20210521135947.6ea005e5@bahia.lan \
--to=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu_oss@crudebyte.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).