All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>,
	Fox Chen <foxhlchen@gmail.com>,
	Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@gmail.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	Rick Lindsley <ricklind@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] kernfs: add a revision to identify directory node changes
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2021 12:53:37 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a6o1k1cu.fsf@disp2133> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <162306071065.69474.8064509709844383785.stgit@web.messagingengine.com> (Ian Kent's message of "Mon, 07 Jun 2021 18:11:50 +0800")

Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> writes:

> Add a revision counter to kernfs directory nodes so it can be used
> to detect if a directory node has changed.
>
> There's an assumption that sizeof(unsigned long) <= sizeof(pointer)
> on all architectures and as far as I know that assumption holds.
>
> So adding a revision counter to the struct kernfs_elem_dir variant of
> the kernfs_node type union won't increase the size of the kernfs_node
> struct. This is because struct kernfs_elem_dir is at least
> sizeof(pointer) smaller than the largest union variant. It's tempting
> to make the revision counter a u64 but that would increase the size of
> kernfs_node on archs where sizeof(pointer) is smaller than the revision
> counter.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
> ---
>  fs/kernfs/dir.c             |    8 ++++++++
>  fs/kernfs/kernfs-internal.h |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/kernfs.h      |    5 +++++
>  3 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/dir.c b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> index 33166ec90a112..b88432c48851f 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,7 @@ static int kernfs_link_sibling(struct kernfs_node *kn)
>  	/* successfully added, account subdir number */
>  	if (kernfs_type(kn) == KERNFS_DIR)
>  		kn->parent->dir.subdirs++;
> +	kernfs_inc_rev(kn->parent);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -394,6 +395,7 @@ static bool kernfs_unlink_sibling(struct kernfs_node *kn)
>  
>  	if (kernfs_type(kn) == KERNFS_DIR)
>  		kn->parent->dir.subdirs--;
> +	kernfs_inc_rev(kn->parent);
>  
>  	rb_erase(&kn->rb, &kn->parent->dir.children);
>  	RB_CLEAR_NODE(&kn->rb);
> @@ -1105,6 +1107,12 @@ static struct dentry *kernfs_iop_lookup(struct inode *dir,
>  
>  	/* instantiate and hash dentry */
>  	ret = d_splice_alias(inode, dentry);
> +	if (!IS_ERR(ret)) {
> +		if (unlikely(ret))
> +			kernfs_set_rev(parent, ret);
> +		else
> +			kernfs_set_rev(parent, dentry);

Do we care about d_time on non-NULL dentries?

For d_splice_alias to return a different dentry implies
that the dentry was non-NULL.

I am wondering if having a guarantee that d_time never changes could
help simplify the implementation.  For never changing it would see to
make sense to call kernfs_set_rev before d_splice_alias on dentry, and
simply not worry about it after d_splice_alias.

> +	}
>   out_unlock:
>  	mutex_unlock(&kernfs_mutex);
>  	return ret;
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/kernfs-internal.h b/fs/kernfs/kernfs-internal.h
> index ccc3b44f6306f..1536002584fc4 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/kernfs-internal.h
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/kernfs-internal.h
> @@ -81,6 +81,30 @@ static inline struct kernfs_node *kernfs_dentry_node(struct dentry *dentry)
>  	return d_inode(dentry)->i_private;
>  }
>  
> +static inline void kernfs_set_rev(struct kernfs_node *kn,
> +				  struct dentry *dentry)
> +{
> +	if (kernfs_type(kn) == KERNFS_DIR)
> +		dentry->d_time = kn->dir.rev;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void kernfs_inc_rev(struct kernfs_node *kn)
> +{
> +	if (kernfs_type(kn) == KERNFS_DIR)
> +		kn->dir.rev++;
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool kernfs_dir_changed(struct kernfs_node *kn,
> +				      struct dentry *dentry)
> +{
> +	if (kernfs_type(kn) == KERNFS_DIR) {
> +		/* Not really a time bit it does what's needed */
> +		if (time_after(kn->dir.rev, dentry->d_time))
> +			return true;

Why not simply make this:
		if (kn->dir.rev != dentry->d_time)
	        	return true;

I don't see what is gained by not counting as changed something in the
wrong half of the values.

> +	}
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
>  extern const struct super_operations kernfs_sops;
>  extern struct kmem_cache *kernfs_node_cache, *kernfs_iattrs_cache;
>  
> diff --git a/include/linux/kernfs.h b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> index 9e8ca8743c268..7947acb1163d7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kernfs.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> @@ -98,6 +98,11 @@ struct kernfs_elem_dir {
>  	 * better directly in kernfs_node but is here to save space.
>  	 */
>  	struct kernfs_root	*root;
> +	/*
> +	 * Monotonic revision counter, used to identify if a directory
> +	 * node has changed during revalidation.
> +	 */
> +	unsigned long rev;
>  };
>  
>  struct kernfs_elem_symlink {

Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-07 17:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-07 10:11 [PATCH v5 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/6] kernfs: move revalidate to be near lookup Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/6] kernfs: add a revision to identify directory node changes Ian Kent
2021-06-07 17:53   ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2021-06-08  1:26     ` Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:12 ` [PATCH v5 3/6] kernfs: use VFS negative dentry caching Ian Kent
2021-06-07 18:27   ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-08  1:56     ` Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:12 ` [PATCH v5 4/6] kernfs: switch kernfs to use an rwsem Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:12 ` [PATCH v5 5/6] kernfs: use i_lock to protect concurrent inode updates Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:12 ` [PATCH v5 6/6] kernfs: add kernfs_need_inode_refresh() Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:24 ` [PATCH v5 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement Ian Kent
2021-06-07 10:31   ` [PATCH v5 0/6] kernfs: proposed locking and concurrency improvement (the missing perf attachments) Ian Kent

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=87a6o1k1cu.fsf@disp2133 \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=brice.goglin@gmail.com \
    --cc=cmaiolino@redhat.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=foxhlchen@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=raven@themaw.net \
    --cc=ricklind@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.