From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
npiggin@kernel.dk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] vfs: conditionally call inode_wb_list_del()
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 06:11:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1311826307.2697.19.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110727210104.GA9066@infradead.org>
Le mercredi 27 juillet 2011 à 17:01 -0400, Christoph Hellwig a écrit :
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:59:57PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Btw, I wonder if you should micro-optimize things a bit further by
> > > moving the unhashed checks from the deletion functions into the callers
> > > and thus save a function call for each of them.
> >
> > If the caller is in the same file modern gcc is able to do that automatically
> > if you're lucky enough ("partial inlining")
> >
> > I would not uglify the code for it.
>
> Depending on how you look at it the code might actually be a tad
> cleaner. One of called functions is outside of inode.c.
>
Thats right, thanks again for your valuable input Christoph.
The following is a clear win, since we avoid the call to external
function.
[PATCH] vfs: conditionally call inode_wb_list_del()
Some inodes (pipes, sockets, ...) are not in bdi writeback list.
evict() can avoid calling inode_wb_list_del() and its expensive spinlock
by checking inode i_wb_list being empty or not.
At this point, no other cpu/user can concurrently manipulate this inode
i_wb_list
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
---
fs/inode.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index d0c72ff..9dab13a 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c
@@ -454,7 +454,9 @@ static void evict(struct inode *inode)
BUG_ON(!(inode->i_state & I_FREEING));
BUG_ON(!list_empty(&inode->i_lru));
- inode_wb_list_del(inode);
+ if (!list_empty(&inode->i_wb_list))
+ inode_wb_list_del(inode);
+
inode_sb_list_del(inode);
if (op->evict_inode) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-28 4:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-17 0:50 vfsmount lock issues on very large ppc64 box Anton Blanchard
2011-07-17 1:04 ` Matthew Wilcox
2011-07-17 8:46 ` Andi Kleen
2011-07-18 8:17 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-07-18 15:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-18 15:51 ` Al Viro
2011-07-19 16:32 ` [Patch] VFS : mount lock scalability for files systems without mount point (WAS vfsmount lock issues on very large ppc64 box) Tim Chen
2011-07-21 20:40 ` Al Viro
2011-07-22 0:27 ` Tim Chen
2011-07-23 13:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-25 22:39 ` Tim Chen
2011-07-25 22:51 ` Al Viro
2011-07-25 23:22 ` Tim Chen
2011-07-26 6:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-07-26 8:21 ` [PATCH] vfs: dont chain pipe/anon/socket on superblock s_inodes list Eric Dumazet
2011-07-26 9:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-26 9:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-07-26 9:42 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-26 10:43 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-07-26 11:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-27 15:21 ` [PATCH] vfs: avoid taking locks if inode not in lists Eric Dumazet
2011-07-27 17:12 ` Andi Kleen
2011-07-27 20:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-27 20:59 ` Andi Kleen
2011-07-27 21:01 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-28 4:11 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2011-07-28 4:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-07-28 4:55 ` [PATCH] vfs: avoid call to inode_lru_list_del() if possible Eric Dumazet
2011-07-18 16:41 ` vfsmount lock issues on very large ppc64 box Tim Chen
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=1311826307.2697.19.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®