From: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
To: brauner@kernel.org
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] device_cgroup: avoid access to ->i_rdev in the common case in devcgroup_inode_permission()
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:16:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250416221626.2710239-3-mjguzik@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250416221626.2710239-1-mjguzik@gmail.com>
The routine gets called for every path component during lookup.
->i_mode is going to be cached on account of permission checks, while
->i_rdev is an area which is most likely cache-cold.
gcc 14.2 is kind enough to emit one branch:
movzwl (%rbx),%eax
mov %eax,%edx
and $0xb000,%dx
cmp $0x2000,%dx
je 11bc <inode_permission+0xec>
This patch is lazy in that I don't know if the ->i_rdev branch makes
any sense with the newly added mode check upfront. I am not changing any
semantics here though.
Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
---
include/linux/device_cgroup.h | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/device_cgroup.h b/include/linux/device_cgroup.h
index d02f32b7514e..0864773a57e8 100644
--- a/include/linux/device_cgroup.h
+++ b/include/linux/device_cgroup.h
@@ -18,15 +18,16 @@ static inline int devcgroup_inode_permission(struct inode *inode, int mask)
{
short type, access = 0;
+ if (likely(!S_ISBLK(inode->i_mode) && !S_ISCHR(inode->i_mode)))
+ return 0;
+
if (likely(!inode->i_rdev))
return 0;
if (S_ISBLK(inode->i_mode))
type = DEVCG_DEV_BLOCK;
- else if (S_ISCHR(inode->i_mode))
+ else /* S_ISCHR by the test above */
type = DEVCG_DEV_CHAR;
- else
- return 0;
if (mask & MAY_WRITE)
access |= DEVCG_ACC_WRITE;
--
2.48.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-16 22:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-16 22:16 [PATCH 0/2] two nits for path lookup Mateusz Guzik
2025-04-16 22:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] fs: touch up predicts in inode_permission() Mateusz Guzik
2025-04-16 22:16 ` Mateusz Guzik [this message]
2025-04-16 22:35 ` [PATCH 0/2] two nits for path lookup Mateusz Guzik
2025-04-16 22:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-04-17 8:13 ` Christian Brauner
2025-04-17 9:04 ` Christian Brauner
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=20250416221626.2710239-3-mjguzik@gmail.com \
--to=mjguzik@gmail.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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®