From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, matthew@wil.cx, dhowells@redhat.com,
sage@inktank.com, smfrench@gmail.com, swhiteho@redhat.com,
Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org,
samba-technical@lists.samba.org, cluster-devel@redhat.com,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
piastryyy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/11] locks: encapsulate the fl_link list handling
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 16:17:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604201759.GB15594@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370056054-25449-6-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com>
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:07:28PM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Move the fl_link list handling routines into a separate set of helpers.
> Also move the global list handling out of locks_insert_block, and into
> the caller that ends up triggering it as that allows us to eliminate the
> IS_POSIX check there.
ACK.--b.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> ---
> fs/locks.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index cef0e04..caca466 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -494,13 +494,38 @@ static int posix_same_owner(struct file_lock *fl1, struct file_lock *fl2)
> return fl1->fl_owner == fl2->fl_owner;
> }
>
> +/* Remove a blocker or lock from one of the global lists */
> +static inline void
> +locks_insert_global_blocked(struct file_lock *waiter)
> +{
> + list_add(&waiter->fl_link, &blocked_list);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +locks_delete_global_blocked(struct file_lock *waiter)
> +{
> + list_del_init(&waiter->fl_link);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +locks_insert_global_locks(struct file_lock *waiter)
> +{
> + list_add_tail(&waiter->fl_link, &file_lock_list);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void
> +locks_delete_global_locks(struct file_lock *waiter)
> +{
> + list_del_init(&waiter->fl_link);
> +}
> +
> /* Remove waiter from blocker's block list.
> * When blocker ends up pointing to itself then the list is empty.
> */
> static void __locks_delete_block(struct file_lock *waiter)
> {
> list_del_init(&waiter->fl_block);
> - list_del_init(&waiter->fl_link);
> + locks_delete_global_blocked(waiter);
> waiter->fl_next = NULL;
> }
>
> @@ -524,8 +549,6 @@ static void locks_insert_block(struct file_lock *blocker,
> BUG_ON(!list_empty(&waiter->fl_block));
> list_add_tail(&waiter->fl_block, &blocker->fl_block);
> waiter->fl_next = blocker;
> - if (IS_POSIX(blocker))
> - list_add(&waiter->fl_link, &blocked_list);
> }
>
> /* Wake up processes blocked waiting for blocker.
> @@ -552,7 +575,7 @@ static void locks_wake_up_blocks(struct file_lock *blocker)
> */
> static void locks_insert_lock(struct file_lock **pos, struct file_lock *fl)
> {
> - list_add(&fl->fl_link, &file_lock_list);
> + locks_insert_global_locks(fl);
>
> fl->fl_nspid = get_pid(task_tgid(current));
>
> @@ -573,7 +596,7 @@ static void locks_delete_lock(struct file_lock **thisfl_p)
>
> *thisfl_p = fl->fl_next;
> fl->fl_next = NULL;
> - list_del_init(&fl->fl_link);
> + locks_delete_global_locks(fl);
>
> if (fl->fl_nspid) {
> put_pid(fl->fl_nspid);
> @@ -839,6 +862,7 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str
> goto out;
> error = FILE_LOCK_DEFERRED;
> locks_insert_block(fl, request);
> + locks_insert_global_blocked(request);
> goto out;
> }
> }
> --
> 1.7.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-04 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-01 3:07 [PATCH v1 00/11] locks: scalability improvements for file locking Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 01/11] cifs: use posix_unblock_lock instead of locks_delete_block Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 02/11] locks: make generic_add_lease and generic_delete_lease static Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 03/11] locks: comment cleanups and clarifications Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 22:00 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 11:09 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 04/11] locks: make "added" in __posix_lock_file a bool Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 20:17 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 05/11] locks: encapsulate the fl_link list handling Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 20:17 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 06/11] locks: convert to i_lock to protect i_flock list Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 0:46 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 07/11] locks: only pull entries off of blocked_list when they are really unblocked Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:58 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 11:38 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:24 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 12:38 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 08/11] locks: convert fl_link to a hlist_node Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 21:59 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-05 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-05 12:46 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 09/11] locks: turn the blocked_list into a hashtable Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 10/11] locks: add a new "lm_owner_key" lock operation Jeff Layton
2013-06-01 3:07 ` [PATCH v1 11/11] locks: give the blocked_hash its own spinlock Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:19 ` Stefan (metze) Metzmacher
2013-06-04 14:39 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:46 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-06-04 14:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 15:15 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 14:56 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-03 19:04 ` [PATCH v1 00/11] locks: scalability improvements for file locking Davidlohr Bueso
2013-06-03 21:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-06-04 10:54 ` Jeff Layton
2013-06-04 11:56 ` Jim Rees
2013-06-04 12:15 ` Jeff Layton
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=20130604201759.GB15594@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=piastryyy@gmail.com \
--cc=sage@inktank.com \
--cc=samba-technical@lists.samba.org \
--cc=smfrench@gmail.com \
--cc=swhiteho@redhat.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®