mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>,
	ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ceph updates for 5.20-rc1
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 23:04:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YvV86p5DjBLjjXHo@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgYnAPiGsh7H4BS_E1aMM46PdSGg8YqFhi2SpGw+Ac_PQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 02:52:26PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 2:38 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Exporting the functionality?  Sure, no problem.  Uninlining that one...
> > I suspect that it's OK, but I'd like to see profiling data; it's not
> > as if it would be hard to return to having it inlined, obviously.
> 
> The only case where I think it might matter is in __d_lookup(), and
> it's probably not measurable.
> 
> Yes, __d_lookup() does matter, but it only matters once you've fallen
> out of RCU mode, and at that point the cost of the function call is
> likely in the noise.
> 
> I don't particularly like how it's inside that dentry hash chain loop,
> but realistically by then we've already done a function call for the
> dentry lock spinlock, so that loop already has to deal with it.

FWIW, I wonder if we should do
	if (READ_ONCE(dentry->d_parent) != parent)
		continue;
before grabbing ->d_lock (and repeat the check after grabbing it,
of course).  It's OK from correctness POV - we are OK with false
negatives from __d_lookup() if concurrent rename happens.  And
it just might be a sufficiently large performance win...

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-11 22:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-11 15:24 Ilya Dryomov
2022-08-11 20:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 20:55   ` Ilya Dryomov
2022-08-11 21:08     ` Jeff Layton
2022-08-11 21:22       ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:23         ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:30         ` Jeff Layton
2022-08-11 21:38           ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:52             ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 22:04               ` Al Viro [this message]
2022-08-11 22:22                 ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 22:43                   ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-12  3:58                     ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 19:08                       ` Al Viro
2022-08-14 20:03                         ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 20:29                           ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-14 21:20                             ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-11 22:44                   ` Al Viro
2022-08-11 21:29     ` Linus Torvalds
2022-08-11 21:32 ` pr-tracker-bot

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=YvV86p5DjBLjjXHo@ZenIV \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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®