From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>,
Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: [PATCH 10/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: tidy list walking in ldlm_flock()
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 09:26:47 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <150042040763.20736.17969183285195201575.stgit@noble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <150041997277.20736.17112251996623587423.stgit@noble>
Use list_for_each_entry variants to
avoid the explicit list_entry() calls.
This allows us to use list_for_each_entry_safe_from()
instread of adding a local list-walking macro.
Also improve some comments so that it is more obvious
that the locks are sorted per-owner and that we need
to find the insertion point.
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
---
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c | 45 ++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
index 9a888e1ce923..58227728a002 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c
@@ -59,17 +59,6 @@
#include <linux/list.h>
#include "ldlm_internal.h"
-/**
- * list_for_remaining_safe - iterate over the remaining entries in a list
- * and safeguard against removal of a list entry.
- * \param pos the &struct list_head to use as a loop counter. pos MUST
- * have been initialized prior to using it in this macro.
- * \param n another &struct list_head to use as temporary storage
- * \param head the head for your list.
- */
-#define list_for_remaining_safe(pos, n, head) \
- for (n = pos->next; pos != (head); pos = n, n = pos->next)
-
static inline int
ldlm_same_flock_owner(struct ldlm_lock *lock, struct ldlm_lock *new)
{
@@ -125,8 +114,8 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req)
{
struct ldlm_resource *res = req->l_resource;
struct ldlm_namespace *ns = ldlm_res_to_ns(res);
- struct list_head *tmp;
- struct list_head *ownlocks = NULL;
+ struct ldlm_lock *tmp;
+ struct ldlm_lock *ownlocks = NULL;
struct ldlm_lock *lock = NULL;
struct ldlm_lock *new = req;
struct ldlm_lock *new2 = NULL;
@@ -151,23 +140,23 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req)
/* This loop determines where this processes locks start
* in the resource lr_granted list.
*/
- list_for_each(tmp, &res->lr_granted) {
- lock = list_entry(tmp, struct ldlm_lock,
- l_res_link);
+ list_for_each_entry(lock, &res->lr_granted, l_res_link) {
if (ldlm_same_flock_owner(lock, req)) {
- ownlocks = tmp;
+ ownlocks = lock;
break;
}
}
- /* Scan the locks owned by this process that overlap this request.
+ /* Scan the locks owned by this process to find the insertion point
+ * (as locks are ordered), and to handle overlaps.
* We may have to merge or split existing locks.
*/
- if (!ownlocks)
- ownlocks = &res->lr_granted;
-
- list_for_remaining_safe(ownlocks, tmp, &res->lr_granted) {
- lock = list_entry(ownlocks, struct ldlm_lock, l_res_link);
+ if (ownlocks)
+ lock = ownlocks;
+ else
+ lock = list_entry(&res->lr_granted,
+ struct ldlm_lock, l_res_link);
+ list_for_each_entry_safe_from(lock, tmp, &res->lr_granted, l_res_link) {
if (!ldlm_same_flock_owner(lock, new))
break;
@@ -295,7 +284,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req)
lock->l_granted_mode);
/* insert new2 at lock */
- ldlm_resource_add_lock(res, ownlocks, new2);
+ ldlm_resource_add_lock(res, &lock->l_res_link, new2);
LDLM_LOCK_RELEASE(new2);
break;
}
@@ -309,8 +298,12 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock *req)
if (!added) {
list_del_init(&req->l_res_link);
- /* insert new lock before ownlocks in list. */
- ldlm_resource_add_lock(res, ownlocks, req);
+ /* insert new lock before "lock", which might be
+ * the next lock for this owner, or might be the first
+ * lock for the next owner, order might not be a lock
+ * at all, but instead points at the head of the list
+ */
+ ldlm_resource_add_lock(res, &lock->l_res_link, req);
}
/* In case we're reprocessing the requested lock we can't destroy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-18 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-18 23:26 [PATCH 00/12] Assorted lustre fixes and improvements NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 04/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove 'first_enq' arg from ldlm_process_flock_lock() NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 03/12] staging: lustre: llite: fix various issues with ll_splice_alias NeilBrown
2017-07-19 2:51 ` Oleg Drokin
2017-07-19 4:33 ` NeilBrown
2017-07-19 6:18 ` Oleg Drokin
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 09/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove 'flags' arg from ldlm_flock_destroy() NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 08/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unused 'overlaps' variable NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` NeilBrown [this message]
[not found] ` <BN6PR1101MB2132359E48C9904D3E305EE7CBA60@BN6PR1101MB2132.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2017-07-19 4:36 ` [lustre-devel] [PATCH 10/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: tidy list walking in ldlm_flock() NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 02/12] staging: lustre: llite: fix incorrect DCACHE_DISCONNECTED test NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 05/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unused 'work_list' arg from ldlm_process_flock_lock() NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 07/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove 'flags' " NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 01/12] staging: lustre: fix minor typos in comments NeilBrown
2017-07-19 8:29 ` Greg KH
2017-08-02 3:26 ` [PATCH] " NeilBrown
2017-08-03 17:29 ` [lustre-devel] " James Simmons
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 06/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unneeded 'err' arg to ldlm_process_flock_lock() NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 11/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unnecessary 'ownlocks' variable NeilBrown
2017-07-18 23:26 ` [PATCH 12/12] staging: lustre: ldlm: remove unused field 'fwd_generation' NeilBrown
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=150042040763.20736.17969183285195201575.stgit@noble \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
--cc=oleg.drokin@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®