Linux-BTRFS Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] btrfs: split btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw to read and write helpers
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 18:38:02 +0100
Message-ID: <559c0f46dae93f2aea0d457087f9987c210ffe94.1548264220.git.dsterba@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1548264220.git.dsterba@suse.com>

There are many callers that hardcode the desired lock type so we can
avoid the switch and call them directly. Split the current function to
two but leave a helper that still takes the variable lock type to make
current code compile.  The call sites will be converted in followup
patches.

Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
---
 fs/btrfs/locking.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 fs/btrfs/locking.h | 15 +++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/locking.c b/fs/btrfs/locking.c
index 1da768e5ef75..7201d000f61d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/locking.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/locking.c
@@ -14,35 +14,37 @@
 
 static void btrfs_assert_tree_read_locked(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 
-/*
- * if we currently have a spinning reader or writer lock
- * (indicated by the rw flag) this will bump the count
- * of blocking holders and drop the spinlock.
- */
-void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw(struct extent_buffer *eb, int rw)
+void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_read(struct extent_buffer *eb)
 {
 	/*
-	 * no lock is required.  The lock owner may change if
-	 * we have a read lock, but it won't change to or away
-	 * from us.  If we have the write lock, we are the owner
-	 * and it'll never change.
+	 * No lock is required.  The lock owner may change if we have a read
+	 * lock, but it won't change to or away from us.  If we have the write
+	 * lock, we are the owner and it'll never change.
 	 */
 	if (eb->lock_nested && current->pid == eb->lock_owner)
 		return;
-	if (rw == BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK) {
-		if (atomic_read(&eb->blocking_writers) == 0) {
-			WARN_ON(atomic_read(&eb->spinning_writers) != 1);
-			atomic_dec(&eb->spinning_writers);
-			btrfs_assert_tree_locked(eb);
-			atomic_inc(&eb->blocking_writers);
-			write_unlock(&eb->lock);
-		}
-	} else if (rw == BTRFS_READ_LOCK) {
-		btrfs_assert_tree_read_locked(eb);
-		atomic_inc(&eb->blocking_readers);
-		WARN_ON(atomic_read(&eb->spinning_readers) == 0);
-		atomic_dec(&eb->spinning_readers);
-		read_unlock(&eb->lock);
+	btrfs_assert_tree_read_locked(eb);
+	atomic_inc(&eb->blocking_readers);
+	WARN_ON(atomic_read(&eb->spinning_readers) == 0);
+	atomic_dec(&eb->spinning_readers);
+	read_unlock(&eb->lock);
+}
+
+void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_write(struct extent_buffer *eb)
+{
+	/*
+	 * No lock is required.  The lock owner may change if we have a read
+	 * lock, but it won't change to or away from us.  If we have the write
+	 * lock, we are the owner and it'll never change.
+	 */
+	if (eb->lock_nested && current->pid == eb->lock_owner)
+		return;
+	if (atomic_read(&eb->blocking_writers) == 0) {
+		WARN_ON(atomic_read(&eb->spinning_writers) != 1);
+		atomic_dec(&eb->spinning_writers);
+		btrfs_assert_tree_locked(eb);
+		atomic_inc(&eb->blocking_writers);
+		write_unlock(&eb->lock);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/locking.h b/fs/btrfs/locking.h
index 29135def468e..0453a4797693 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/locking.h
+++ b/fs/btrfs/locking.h
@@ -17,7 +17,8 @@ void btrfs_tree_unlock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 void btrfs_tree_read_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 void btrfs_tree_read_unlock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 void btrfs_tree_read_unlock_blocking(struct extent_buffer *eb);
-void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw(struct extent_buffer *eb, int rw);
+void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_read(struct extent_buffer *eb);
+void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_write(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 void btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw(struct extent_buffer *eb, int rw);
 void btrfs_assert_tree_locked(struct extent_buffer *eb);
 int btrfs_try_tree_read_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb);
@@ -37,6 +38,18 @@ static inline void btrfs_tree_unlock_rw(struct extent_buffer *eb, int rw)
 		BUG();
 }
 
+/*
+ * If we currently have a spinning reader or writer lock (indicated by the rw
+ * flag) this will bump the count of blocking holders and drop the spinlock.
+ */
+static inline void btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw(struct extent_buffer *eb, int rw)
+{
+	if (rw == BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK)
+		btrfs_set_lock_blocking_write(eb);
+	else if (rw == BTRFS_READ_LOCK)
+		btrfs_set_lock_blocking_read(eb);
+}
+
 static inline void btrfs_set_lock_blocking(struct extent_buffer *eb)
 {
 	btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw(eb, BTRFS_WRITE_LOCK);
-- 
2.20.1


  reply index

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-23 17:37 [PATCH 0/6] Extent buffer locking cleanups, part 1 David Sterba
2019-01-23 17:38 ` David Sterba [this message]
2019-01-24  9:05   ` [PATCH 1/6] btrfs: split btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw to read and write helpers Johannes Thumshirn
2019-01-23 17:38 ` [PATCH 2/6] btrfs: split btrfs_clear_lock_blocking_rw " David Sterba
2019-01-24  9:06   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-01-23 17:38 ` [PATCH 3/6] btrfs: replace btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw with appropriate helpers David Sterba
2019-01-24  9:06   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-01-23 17:38 ` [PATCH 4/6] btrfs: open code now trivial btrfs_set_lock_blocking David Sterba
2019-01-24  9:07   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-01-23 17:38 ` [PATCH 5/6] btrfs: simplify waiting loop in btrfs_tree_lock David Sterba
2019-01-24  9:08   ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-01-23 17:38 ` [PATCH 6/6] btrfs: merge btrfs_set_lock_blocking_rw with it's caller David Sterba
2019-01-24  9:08   ` Johannes Thumshirn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=559c0f46dae93f2aea0d457087f9987c210ffe94.1548264220.git.dsterba@suse.com \
    --to=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.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

Linux-BTRFS Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs/0 linux-btrfs/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-btrfs linux-btrfs/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-btrfs \
		linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org linux-btrfs@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-btrfs


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox