From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
hch@infradead.org, ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mhocko@suse.com,
mgorman@techsingularity.net, dave@stgolabs.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
Subject: [PATCH 13/17] procfs: use faster rb_first_cached()
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 18:45:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170719014603.19029-14-dave@stgolabs.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170719014603.19029-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
... such that we can avoid the tree walks to get the
node with the smallest key. Semantically the same,
as the previously used rb_first(), but O(1). The
main overhead is the extra footprint for the cached
rb_node pointer, which should not matter for procfs.
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>
---
fs/proc/generic.c | 26 ++++++++++++++------------
fs/proc/internal.h | 2 +-
fs/proc/proc_net.c | 2 +-
fs/proc/root.c | 2 +-
4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/proc/generic.c b/fs/proc/generic.c
index e3cda0b5968f..ab6496356dc2 100644
--- a/fs/proc/generic.c
+++ b/fs/proc/generic.c
@@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ static int proc_match(unsigned int len, const char *name, struct proc_dir_entry
static struct proc_dir_entry *pde_subdir_first(struct proc_dir_entry *dir)
{
- return rb_entry_safe(rb_first(&dir->subdir), struct proc_dir_entry,
- subdir_node);
+ return rb_entry_safe(rb_first_cached(&dir->subdir),
+ struct proc_dir_entry, subdir_node);
}
static struct proc_dir_entry *pde_subdir_next(struct proc_dir_entry *dir)
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static struct proc_dir_entry *pde_subdir_find(struct proc_dir_entry *dir,
const char *name,
unsigned int len)
{
- struct rb_node *node = dir->subdir.rb_node;
+ struct rb_node *node = dir->subdir.rb_root.rb_node;
while (node) {
struct proc_dir_entry *de = rb_entry(node,
@@ -75,8 +75,9 @@ static struct proc_dir_entry *pde_subdir_find(struct proc_dir_entry *dir,
static bool pde_subdir_insert(struct proc_dir_entry *dir,
struct proc_dir_entry *de)
{
- struct rb_root *root = &dir->subdir;
- struct rb_node **new = &root->rb_node, *parent = NULL;
+ struct rb_root_cached *root = &dir->subdir;
+ struct rb_node **new = &root->rb_root.rb_node, *parent = NULL;
+ bool leftmost = true;
/* Figure out where to put new node */
while (*new) {
@@ -88,15 +89,16 @@ static bool pde_subdir_insert(struct proc_dir_entry *dir,
parent = *new;
if (result < 0)
new = &(*new)->rb_left;
- else if (result > 0)
+ else if (result > 0) {
new = &(*new)->rb_right;
- else
+ leftmost = false;
+ } else
return false;
}
/* Add new node and rebalance tree. */
rb_link_node(&de->subdir_node, parent, new);
- rb_insert_color(&de->subdir_node, root);
+ rb_insert_color_cached(&de->subdir_node, root, leftmost);
return true;
}
@@ -369,7 +371,7 @@ static struct proc_dir_entry *__proc_create(struct proc_dir_entry **parent,
ent->namelen = qstr.len;
ent->mode = mode;
ent->nlink = nlink;
- ent->subdir = RB_ROOT;
+ ent->subdir = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
atomic_set(&ent->count, 1);
spin_lock_init(&ent->pde_unload_lock);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ent->pde_openers);
@@ -545,7 +547,7 @@ void remove_proc_entry(const char *name, struct proc_dir_entry *parent)
de = pde_subdir_find(parent, fn, len);
if (de)
- rb_erase(&de->subdir_node, &parent->subdir);
+ rb_erase_cached(&de->subdir_node, &parent->subdir);
write_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
if (!de) {
WARN(1, "name '%s'\n", name);
@@ -582,13 +584,13 @@ int remove_proc_subtree(const char *name, struct proc_dir_entry *parent)
write_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
return -ENOENT;
}
- rb_erase(&root->subdir_node, &parent->subdir);
+ rb_erase_cached(&root->subdir_node, &parent->subdir);
de = root;
while (1) {
next = pde_subdir_first(de);
if (next) {
- rb_erase(&next->subdir_node, &de->subdir);
+ rb_erase_cached(&next->subdir_node, &de->subdir);
de = next;
continue;
}
diff --git a/fs/proc/internal.h b/fs/proc/internal.h
index aa2b89071630..8382d08385a9 100644
--- a/fs/proc/internal.h
+++ b/fs/proc/internal.h
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ struct proc_dir_entry {
const struct inode_operations *proc_iops;
const struct file_operations *proc_fops;
struct proc_dir_entry *parent;
- struct rb_root subdir;
+ struct rb_root_cached subdir;
struct rb_node subdir_node;
void *data;
atomic_t count; /* use count */
diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_net.c b/fs/proc/proc_net.c
index d72fc40241d9..a2bf369c923d 100644
--- a/fs/proc/proc_net.c
+++ b/fs/proc/proc_net.c
@@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ static __net_init int proc_net_ns_init(struct net *net)
if (!netd)
goto out;
- netd->subdir = RB_ROOT;
+ netd->subdir = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
netd->data = net;
netd->nlink = 2;
netd->namelen = 3;
diff --git a/fs/proc/root.c b/fs/proc/root.c
index deecb397daa3..926fb27f4ca2 100644
--- a/fs/proc/root.c
+++ b/fs/proc/root.c
@@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ struct proc_dir_entry proc_root = {
.proc_iops = &proc_root_inode_operations,
.proc_fops = &proc_root_operations,
.parent = &proc_root,
- .subdir = RB_ROOT,
+ .subdir = RB_ROOT_CACHED,
.name = "/proc",
};
--
2.12.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-19 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-19 1:45 [PATCH -next v4 00/17] rbtree: cache leftmost node internally Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 01/17] " Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 02/17] rbtree: optimize root-check during rebalancing loop Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 03/17] rbtree: add some additional comments for rebalancing cases Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 04/17] lib/rbtree_test.c: make input module parameters Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 05/17] lib/rbtree_test.c: add (inorder) traversal test Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 06/17] lib/rbtree_test.c: support rb_root_cached Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 07/17] sched/fair: replace cfs_rq->rb_leftmost Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 08/17] sched/deadline: replace earliest dl and rq leftmost caching Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 09/17] locking/rtmutex: replace top-waiter and pi_waiters " Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 10/17] block/cfq: replace cfq_rb_root " Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 7:46 ` Jan Kara
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 11/17] lib/interval_tree: fast overlap detection Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-22 17:52 ` Doug Ledford
2017-08-01 17:16 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-07-19 1:45 ` [PATCH 12/17] lib/interval-tree: correct comment wrt generic flavor Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:45 ` Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2017-07-19 1:46 ` [PATCH 14/17] fs/epoll: use faster rb_first_cached() Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:46 ` [PATCH 15/17] fs/ext4: use cached rbtrees Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 7:40 ` Jan Kara
2017-07-19 22:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 1:46 ` [PATCH 16/17] mem/memcg: cache rightmost node Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 7:50 ` Michal Hocko
2017-07-26 21:09 ` Andrew Morton
2017-07-27 7:06 ` Michal Hocko
2017-07-19 1:46 ` [PATCH 17/17] block/cfq: cache rightmost rb_node Davidlohr Bueso
2017-07-19 7:59 ` Jan Kara
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=20170719014603.19029-14-dave@stgolabs.net \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ldufour@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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®