From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751690AbaE0Hhx (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2014 03:37:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35434 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750949AbaE0Hhw (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2014 03:37:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:37:38 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Jiri Olsa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Corey Ashford , David Ahern , Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Jean Pihet , Paul Mackerras , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] perf tools: Cache dso data file descriptor Message-ID: <20140527073738.GA12920@krava.brq.redhat.com> References: <1400174615-2121-1-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> <1400174615-2121-7-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> <87tx8chvzb.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tx8chvzb.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:05:28AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Jiri, > > On Thu, 15 May 2014 19:23:27 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > [SNIP] > > +static void data_close(void) > > +{ > > + bool cache_fd = may_cache_fd(); > > + > > + if (!cache_fd) > > + close_first_dso(); > > +} > > Why do you do this at close()? As long as there's no attempt to open a > new file, we can keep existing fd, no? so the way it works now is: - we keep up to the 'RLIMIT_NOFILE / 2' of open dso objects - if we try to open dso and it fails, because we are out of file descriptors, we close dso objects and try to reopen (check do_open function) - when we close the dso object we check if number of opened dso objects is below 'RLIMIT_NOFILE / 2'.. if it is, we keep the dso opened, if not we close first dso in the list util/dso.h tries to describe that > > > + > > +void dso__data_close(struct dso *dso) > > +{ > > + if (dso->data.fd >= 0) > > + data_close(); > > +} > > Hmm.. it's confusing dso__data_close(dso) closes an other dso rather > than the given dso. And this dso__data_close() is not paired with any > _open() also these close calls make me confusing which one to use. ;-p thats due to the caching.. as explained above About the pairing.. originally the interface was only dso__data_fd that opened and returned fd, which the caller needed to close. I added dso__data_close so we could keep track of file descriptors. I could add dso__data_open I guess, but it is dso__data_fd which is needed for elf interface anyway. thanks, jirka