Linux RCU subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Cc: Yufen Yu <yuyufen@huawei.com>,
	axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
	zhengchuan@huawei.com, yi.zhang@huawei.com, paulmck@kernel.org,
	joel@joelfernandes.org, rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: make sure last_lookup set as NULL after part deleted
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 11:19:41 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200108031941.GD28075@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <762e1d7b-af3e-93f4-c744-ecd8ae8946e8@huawei.com>

On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 07:40:10PM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2020/1/6 18:05, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 05:41:45PM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> [snipped]
> 
> >> Yes. The solution you proposed also adds an invocation of percpu_ref_tryget_live()
> >> in the fast path. Not sure which one will have a better performance. However the
> >> reason we prefer the index caching is the simplicity instead of performance.
> > 
> > No, hd_struct_try_get() and hd_struct_get() is always called once for one IO, the
> > patch I proposed changes nothing about this usage.
> > 
> > Please take a close look at the patch:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/5cc465cc-d68c-088e-0729-2695279c7853@huawei.com/T/#m8f3e6b4e77eadf006ce142a84c966f50f3a9ae26
> > 
> > which just moves hd_struct_try_get() from blk_account_io_start() into
> > disk_map_sector_rcu(), doesn't it?
> > 
> Yes, you are right. And a little suggestion for your patch:
> 
> @@ -283,8 +289,9 @@ void delete_partition(struct gendisk *disk, int partno)
>  	if (!part)
>  		return;
> 
> +	get_device(disk_to_dev(disk));
>  	rcu_assign_pointer(ptbl->part[partno], NULL);
> -	rcu_assign_pointer(ptbl->last_lookup, NULL);
> +
>  	kobject_put(part->holder_dir);
>  	device_del(part_to_dev(part));
> 
> Could we move the call of get_device() into add_partition, and that will make the assignment of
> disk to p->disk in add_partition() be natural ?

It isn't necessary to do that way, the parent disk's refcount isn't released
until device_del(part_to_dev(part)). So it is enough to hold disk's refcount
before calling device_del(part).

> 
> Maybe there is no need to add a new disk field in hd_struct, because the kobject of gendisk
> is already the parent of hd_struct. But make use of part->__dev.parent after the calling
> of device_del() is a bad_idea.

Yeah, that is why I added 'disk' field, which can be put with other
fields not accessed in fast path.

BTW, 'struct percpu_ref ref' should have been put just after 'nr_sects',
then these fast path fields can share single cache line.


Thanks,
Ming


  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-08  3:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20191231110945.10857-1-yuyufen@huawei.com>
2019-12-31 14:55 ` [PATCH] block: make sure last_lookup set as NULL after part deleted Hou Tao
2019-12-31 23:11   ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-01-01  2:33     ` htbegin
2020-01-01  3:39       ` htbegin
2020-01-03 23:45     ` Joel Fernandes
2020-01-04  9:16       ` Hou Tao
2020-01-02  1:23   ` Ming Lei
2020-01-03  3:06     ` Hou Tao
2020-01-03  4:18       ` Ming Lei
2020-01-03  7:35         ` Hou Tao
2020-01-03  8:17           ` Ming Lei
2020-01-03 12:03             ` Yufen Yu
2020-01-03 15:16               ` Ming Lei
2020-01-06  7:39                 ` Yufen Yu
2020-01-06  8:11                   ` Ming Lei
2020-01-06  9:41                     ` Hou Tao
2020-01-06 10:05                       ` Ming Lei
2020-01-07 11:40                         ` Hou Tao
2020-01-08  3:19                           ` Ming Lei [this message]
2020-01-03 12:43   ` Yufen Yu

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=20200108031941.GD28075@ming.t460p \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=yuyufen@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhengchuan@huawei.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