All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/46] fs: dcache scale hash
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:35:20 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101210023520.GC3331@amd> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101209234258.GB9925@dastard>

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 10:42:58AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 11:53:27PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > >> Like I said, there are infinite cleanups or improvements you can make.
> > >> It does not particularly matter that they happen before or after the
> > >> scaling work, except if there are classes of APIs that the new locking
> > >> model can no longer support.
> > >
> > > We do plenty of cleanups when changing code when the result gives us
> > > simpler and easier to understand code. It's a trivial change that,
> > > IMO, makes the code more consistent and easier to follow.
> > 
> > Unrelated "cleanups" in the same patch as non trivial locking change
> > is stupid.
> 
> So put it in another prepartory patch. It makes the locking changes
> easier to understand...

I didn't change that, though, the ordering of locking unrelated
dentries and the code is already in rename code and is not touched
during this patch set.


> > Necessary changes to prevent bad ugliness resulting, or preventing
> > repeated steps for the particular changes, etc. of course. Killing un
> > related functions no.
> 
> Ok, I get the picture. You don't want a code review, you want a
> rubber stamp. Find someone else to get it from.

Of course I want code review. I am not going to just do everything
you say that I don't agree with, but I will explain why every time
(as I have done to all your points).

I would prefer more in-depth review than from someone who doesn't know
d_lock protects d_flags, but any and all help is welcome. Even minor
nitpicking or cleanups are welcome if they are relevant to the patches.

Thanks,
Nick

PS. don't accuse me of not wanting a code review, because you're just
projecting. To paraphrase you:

 I don't have to justify myself to you, nick, only the maintainers, so
 I'm not answering.

In response to my questions.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-12-10  2:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 105+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-27 10:15 [PATCH 00/46] rcu-walk and dcache scaling Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 02/46] fs: d_validate fixes Nick Piggin
2010-12-08  1:53   ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-08  6:59     ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  0:50       ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09  0:50         ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09  4:50         ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  4:50           ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 03/46] kernel: kmem_ptr_validate considered harmful Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 04/46] fs: dcache documentation cleanup Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 05/46] fs: change d_delete semantics Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 06/46] cifs: dont overwrite dentry name in d_revalidate Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 07/46] jfs: " Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 08/46] fs: change d_compare for rcu-walk Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 09/46] fs: change d_hash " Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 10/46] hostfs: simplify locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 11/46] fs: dcache scale hash Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  6:09   ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09  6:28     ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  8:17       ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09 12:53         ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09 23:42           ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-10  2:35             ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2010-12-10  9:01               ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-13  4:48                 ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-13  5:05                 ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 12/46] fs: dcache scale lru Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  7:22   ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09 12:34     ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 13/46] fs: dcache scale dentry refcount Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 14/46] fs: dcache scale d_unhashed Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 15/46] fs: dcache scale subdirs Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 16/46] fs: scale inode alias list Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 17/46] fs: Use rename lock and RCU for multi-step operations Nick Piggin
2011-01-18 22:32   ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2011-01-18 22:42     ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-19 22:27       ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2011-01-19 22:32         ` Nick Piggin
2011-01-25 22:10           ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2011-01-27  5:18             ` Nick Piggin
2011-02-07 18:52               ` Jim Schutt
2011-02-07 21:04                 ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2011-02-07 21:04                   ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2011-02-07 21:31                   ` Jim Schutt
2011-02-07 21:35                     ` Gregory Farnum
2011-02-07 22:25                   ` Jim Schutt
2011-02-14 17:57               ` Yehuda Sadeh Weinraub
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 18/46] fs: increase d_name lock coverage Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 19/46] fs: dcache remove dcache_lock Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 20/46] fs: dcache avoid starvation in dcache multi-step operations Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 21/46] fs: dcache reduce dput locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 22/46] fs: dcache reduce locking in d_alloc Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 23/46] fs: dcache reduce dcache_inode_lock Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 24/46] fs: dcache rationalise dget variants Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 25/46] fs: dcache reduce d_parent locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 26/46] fs: dcache reduce prune_one_dentry locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 27/46] fs: reduce dcache_inode_lock width in lru scanning Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 28/46] fs: use RCU in shrink_dentry_list to reduce lock nesting Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:44 ` [PATCH 29/46] fs: consolidate dentry kill sequence Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 30/46] fs: icache RCU free inodes Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 31/46] fs: avoid inode RCU freeing for pseudo fs Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 32/46] kernel: optimise seqlock Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 33/46] fs: rcu-walk for path lookup Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 34/46] fs: fs_struct use seqlock Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 35/46] fs: dcache remove d_mounted Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 36/46] fs: dcache reduce branches in lookup path Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 37/46] fs: cache optimise dentry and inode for rcu-walk Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 38/46] fs: prefetch inode data in dcache lookup Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 39/46] fs: d_revalidate_rcu for rcu-walk Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 40/46] fs: provide rcu-walk aware permission i_ops Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 41/46] fs: provide simple rcu-walk ACL implementation Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 42/46] kernel: add bl_list Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 43/46] bit_spinlock: add required includes Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 44/46] fs: dcache per-bucket dcache hash locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 45/46] fs: dcache per-inode inode alias locking Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:45 ` [PATCH 46/46] fs: improve scalability of pseudo filesystems Nick Piggin
2010-11-27  9:56 ` [PATCH 01/46] Revert "fs: use RCU read side protection in d_validate" Nick Piggin
2010-12-08  1:16   ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-08  9:38     ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  0:44       ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-09  4:38         ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-09  5:16           ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-27 15:04 ` [PATCH 00/46] rcu-walk and dcache scaling Anca Emanuel
2010-11-27 15:04   ` Anca Emanuel
2010-11-28  3:28   ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-28  3:28     ` Nick Piggin
2010-11-28  6:24     ` Sedat Dilek
2010-12-01 18:03 ` David Miller
2010-12-03 16:55   ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-07 11:25 ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-07 15:24   ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-07 15:24     ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-07 15:49     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-07 15:59       ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-07 16:23         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-08  3:28     ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-07 21:56 ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-08  1:47   ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-08  3:32     ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-08  4:28       ` Dave Chinner
2010-12-08  7:09         ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-08  7:09           ` Nick Piggin
2010-12-10 20:32           ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-12 14:54             ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-12-12 14:54               ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20101210023520.GC3331@amd \
    --to=npiggin@kernel.dk \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    /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.