lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: release the write lock on flush_commit_list()

* Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 15:13 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 07:42:47AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > flush_commit_list() uses ll_rw_block() to commit the pending log blocks.
> > > > ll_rw_block() might sleep, and the bkl was released at this point. Then
> > > > we can also relax the write lock at this point.
> > > >
> > > > [ Impact: release the reiserfs write lock when it is not needed ]
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
> > > > Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
> > > > Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c | 7 +++++--
> > > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/journal.c b/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > index 373d080..b1ebd5a 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/reiserfs/journal.c
> > > > @@ -1120,8 +1120,11 @@ static int flush_commit_list(struct super_block *s,
> > > > SB_ONDISK_JOURNAL_SIZE(s);
> > > > tbh = journal_find_get_block(s, bn);
> > > > if (tbh) {
> > > > - if (buffer_dirty(tbh))
> > > > - ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh) ;
> > > > + if (buffer_dirty(tbh)) {
> > > > + reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > > > + ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh);
> > > > + reiserfs_write_lock(s);
> > > > + }
> > > > put_bh(tbh) ;
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > >
> > > there's 7 other instances of ll_rw_block():
> > >
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- spin_unlock(lock);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &bh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- spin_lock(lock);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(WRITE, 1, &tbh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- reiserfs_write_lock(s);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- /* read in the log blocks, memcpy to the corresponding real block */
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(READ, get_desc_trans_len(desc), log_blocks);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- for (i = 0; i < get_desc_trans_len(desc); i++) {
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- set_buffer_dirty(real_blocks[i]);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(SWRITE, 1, real_blocks + i);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- }
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- }
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c: ll_rw_block(READ, j, bhlist);
> > > fs/reiserfs/journal.c- for (i = 1; i < j; i++)
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- if (!buffer_uptodate(bh[j]))
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c: ll_rw_block(READA, 1, bh + j);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- brelse(bh[j]);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- reada_blocks, reada_count);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c: ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &bh);
> > > fs/reiserfs/stree.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(sb);
> > > --
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c-{
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c: ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)));
> > > fs/reiserfs/super.c- reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
> > >
> > > in particular the second stree.c one and the super.c has a
> > > write-unlock straight before the lock-drop.
> > >
> > > I think the stree.c unlock could be moved to before the
> > > ll_rw_block() call straight away.
> >
> >
> > Indeed.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > The super.c one needs more care: first put &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s))
> > > into a local variable, then unlock the wite-lock, then call
> > > ll_rw_block(). (This is important because &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)) is
> > > global filesystem state that has to be read with the lock held.)
> >
> >
> > Indeed &(SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB(s)) is a pointer to blocks that
> > reflect the state of the filesystem but it was already not
> > safe on the old code.
> >
>
> SB_BUFFER_WITH_SB isn't going to change. It gets set once during
> mount and will return the same buffer from then on.

Are we holding a permanent reference to it after the first read? If
yes then any bread done on an uptodate bh will return immediately
without scheduling.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-01 15:35    [W:0.070 / U:0.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site