mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: reduce number of contentions in search_by_key()
Date: Fri,  8 May 2009 20:35:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1241807725-6263-6-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1241807725-6263-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com>

search_by_key() is a central function in reiserfs which searches
the patch in the fs tree from the root to a node given its key.

It is the function that is most requesting the write lock
because it's a path very often used.

Also we forget to release the lock while reading the next tree node,
making us holding the lock in a wasteful way.

Then we release the lock while reading the current node and its childs,
all-in-one. It should be safe because we have a reference to these
blocks and even if we read a block that will be concurrently changed,
we have an fs_changed check later that will make us retry the path from
the root.

[ Impact: release the write lock while unused in a hot path ]

Cc: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
---
 fs/reiserfs/stree.c |   12 +++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/reiserfs/stree.c b/fs/reiserfs/stree.c
index 6ddcecb..960c911 100644
--- a/fs/reiserfs/stree.c
+++ b/fs/reiserfs/stree.c
@@ -529,6 +529,14 @@ static void search_by_key_reada(struct super_block *s,
 	for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
 		bh[i] = sb_getblk(s, b[i]);
 	}
+	/*
+	 * We are going to read some blocks on which we
+	 * have a reference. It's safe, though we might be
+	 * reading blocks concurrently changed if we release
+	 * the lock. But it's still fine because we check later
+	 * if the tree changed
+	 */
+	reiserfs_write_unlock(s);
 	for (j = 0; j < i; j++) {
 		/*
 		 * note, this needs attention if we are getting rid of the BKL
@@ -626,10 +634,12 @@ int search_by_key(struct super_block *sb, const struct cpu_key *key,	/* Key to s
 		if ((bh = last_element->pe_buffer =
 		     sb_getblk(sb, block_number))) {
 			if (!buffer_uptodate(bh) && reada_count > 1)
+				/* will unlock the write lock */
 				search_by_key_reada(sb, reada_bh,
 						    reada_blocks, reada_count);
+			else
+				reiserfs_write_unlock(sb);
 			ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &bh);
-			reiserfs_write_unlock(sb);
 			wait_on_buffer(bh);
 			reiserfs_write_lock(sb);
 			if (!buffer_uptodate(bh))
-- 
1.6.2.3


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-05-08 18:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-08 18:35 [PATCH 0/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs performances updates Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 1/7] kill-the-BKL/reiserfs: add reiserfs_cond_resched() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 2/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: conditionaly release the write lock on fs_changed() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 3/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: lock only once on reiserfs_get_block() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 4/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: don't hold the write recursively in reiserfs_lookup() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 6/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: factorize the locking in reiserfs_write_end() Frederic Weisbecker
2009-05-08 18:35 ` [PATCH 7/7] kill-the-bkl/reiserfs: use mutex_lock in reiserfs_mutex_lock_safe Frederic Weisbecker

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=1241807725-6263-6-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.beregalov@gmail.com \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=jeffm@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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

Powered by JetHome