lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH 4/8] revoke: core code V7
From
Date

On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 17:16 +0200, Pekka J Enberg wrote:

> +static int revoke_files(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> + struct super_block *sb;
> + struct file *file;
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + sb = inode->i_sb;
> + if (!sb)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> +restart:
> + file_list_lock();
> + list_for_each_entry(file, &sb->s_files, f_u.fu_list) {
> + struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
> +
> + if (dentry->d_inode != inode)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (file->f_op != inode->i_fop)
> + continue;
> +
> + get_file(file);
> +
> + /*
> + * inode->i_mutex cannot be acquired under files_lock
> + */
> + file_list_unlock();
> +
> + err = file->f_op->revoke(file);
> + make_revoked_file(inode, file);
> + fput(file);
> +
> + if (err)
> + goto out;
> +
> + if (signal_pending(current)) {
> + err = -EINTR;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + cond_resched();
> + goto restart;
> + }
> + file_list_unlock();
> +out:
> + return err;
> +}

Humm, we were trying to get rid of file_list_lock(), this puts up
another user of the sb file list.

Also, that loop looks horribly expensive: n*(1+m); where n is the list
size, and m the number of matching fds.

Granted, I see no other options either.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-15 16:17    [W:0.053 / U:0.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site