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 23:44:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YvWGOKqmuaGm8yCd@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjCa=Xf=pA2Z844WnwEeYgy9OPoB2kWphvg7PVn3ohScw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 03:22:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 3:04 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > 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,
>
> It kind of makes sense. We already do that d_name.hash check outside
> of the lock, so we already have that "we might race with a rename"
> situation.
>
> That said, I do think __d_lookup_rcu() is the more important of the two.
>
> Here's a recreation of that patch I mentioned where the OP_COMPARE is
> moved out of the loop. Just for fun, look at how much better the code
> generation is for the common case when you don't have the call messing
> up the clobbered registers etc.
>
> Entirely untested, and I might have messed something up, but I suspect
> this is a much bigger deal than whether d_same_name() is inlined or
> not in the non-RCU path.
Looks sane at the first pass, but right now I'm really half-asleep - 5 hours
of sleep tonight, and about the same yesterday ;-/
I'll try to grab at least an hour or two and reread it once I'm more or less
awake...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-11 22:44 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
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 [this message]
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=YvWGOKqmuaGm8yCd@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®