From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHSET] epoll cleanups
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2020 21:05:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201004200531.GR3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjmrwNf65FZ7-S_3nJ3vEQYOruG4EoJ3Wcm2t-GvpVn4w@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 11:08:11AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 7:36 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Locking and especially control flow in fs/eventpoll.c is
> > overcomplicated. As the result, the code has been hard to follow
> > and easy to fuck up while modifying.
>
> Scanning through the patches they all look superficially ok to me, but
> I'm wondering how much test coverage you have (because I'm wondering
> how much test coverage we have in general for epoll).
Besides the in-tree one (tools/testing/selftests/filesystems/epoll)
and LTP stuff (testcases/kernel/syscalls/epoll) - only davidel's
epoll_test.c. Plus slapped together "let's try to make it go through
that codepath" stuff (combined with printks in fs/eventpoll.c)...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-04 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-04 2:36 [RFC][PATCHSET] epoll cleanups Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 01/27] epoll: switch epitem->pwqlist to single-linked list Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 02/27] epoll: get rid of epitem->nwait Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 03/27] untangling ep_call_nested(): get rid of useless arguments Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 04/27] untangling ep_call_nested(): it's all serialized on epmutex Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 05/27] untangling ep_call_nested(): take pushing cookie into a helper Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 06/27] untangling ep_call_nested(): move push/pop of cookie into the callbacks Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 07/27] untangling ep_call_nested(): and there was much rejoicing Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 08/27] reverse_path_check_proc(): sane arguments Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 09/27] reverse_path_check_proc(): don't bother with cookies Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 10/27] clean reverse_path_check_proc() a bit Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 11/27] ep_loop_check_proc(): lift pushing the cookie into callers Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 12/27] get rid of ep_push_nested() Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 13/27] ep_loop_check_proc(): saner calling conventions Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 14/27] ep_scan_ready_list(): prepare to splitup Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 15/27] lift the calls of ep_read_events_proc() into the callers Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 16/27] lift the calls of ep_send_events_proc() " Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 17/27] ep_send_events_proc(): fold into the caller Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 18/27] lift locking/unlocking ep->mtx out of ep_{start,done}_scan() Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 19/27] ep_insert(): don't open-code ep_remove() on failure exits Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 20/27] ep_insert(): we only need tep->mtx around the insertion itself Al Viro
2020-10-04 12:56 ` [ep_insert()] 9ee1cc5666: WARNING:possible_recursive_locking_detected kernel test robot
2020-10-04 14:17 ` Al Viro
2020-10-04 14:27 ` Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 21/27] take the common part of ep_eventpoll_poll() and ep_item_poll() into helper Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 22/27] fold ep_read_events_proc() into the only caller Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 23/27] ep_insert(): move creation of wakeup source past the fl_ep_links insertion Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 24/27] convert ->f_ep_links/->fllink to hlist Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 25/27] lift rcu_read_lock() into reverse_path_check() Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 26/27] epoll: massage the check list insertion Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:39 ` [RFC PATCH 27/27] epoll: take epitem list out of struct file Al Viro
2020-10-05 20:37 ` Qian Cai
2020-10-05 20:49 ` Al Viro
2020-10-04 2:49 ` [RFC][PATCHSET] epoll cleanups Al Viro
2020-10-04 12:13 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-10-04 14:15 ` Al Viro
2020-10-04 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-10-04 20:05 ` Al Viro [this message]
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=20201004200531.GR3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).