From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: performance delta after VFS i_mutex=>i_rwsem conversion
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 01:40:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160607004058.GH14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1606061649070.12258@i7>
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 04:50:59PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2016, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > True in general, but here we really do a lot under that ->d_lock - all
> > list traversals are under it. So I suspect that contention on nested
> > lock is not an issue in that particular load. It's certainly a separate
> > commit, so we'll see how much does it give on its own, but I doubt that
> > it'll be anywhere near enough.
>
> Hmm. Maybe.
>
> But at least we can try to minimize everything that happens under the
> dentry->d_lock spinlock.
>
> So how about this patch? It's entirely untested, but it rewrites that
> readdir() function to try to do the minimum possible under the d_lock
> spinlock.
>
> I say "rewrite", because it really is totally different. It's not just
> that the nested "next" locking is gone, it also treats the cursor very
> differently and tries to avoid doing any unnecessary cursor list
> operations.
Similar to what I've got here, except that mine has a couple of helper
functions usable in dcache_dir_lseek() as well:
next_positive(parent, child, n) - returns nth positive child after that one
or NULL if there's less than n such. NULL as the second argument => search
from the beginning.
move_cursor(cursor, child) - moves cursor immediately past child *or* to
the very end if child is NULL.
The third commit in series will be the lockless replacement for
for next_positive(). move_cursor() is easy - it became simply
struct dentry *parent = cursor->d_parent;
unsigned n, *seq = &parent->d_inode->i_dir_seq;
spin_lock(&parent->d_lock);
for (;;) {
n = *seq;
if (!(n & 1) && cmpxchg(seq, n, n + 1) == n)
break;
cpu_relax();
}
__list_del(cursor->d_child.prev, cursor->d_child.next);
if (child)
list_add(&cursor->d_child, &child->d_child);
else
list_add_tail(&cursor->d_child, &parent->d_subdirs);
smp_store_release(seq, n + 2);
spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
with
static struct dentry *next_positive(struct dentry *parent,
struct dentry *child, int count)
{
struct list_head *p = child ? &child->d_child : &parent->d_subdirs;
unsigned *seq = &parent->d_inode->i_dir_seq, n;
do {
int i = count;
n = smp_load_acquire(seq) & ~1;
rcu_read_lock();
do {
p = p->next;
if (p == &parent->d_subdirs) {
child = NULL;
break;
}
child = list_entry(p, struct dentry, d_child);
} while (!simple_positive(child) || --i);
rcu_read_unlock();
} while (unlikely(smp_load_acquire(seq) != n));
return child;
}
as initial attempt at lockless next_positive(); barriers are probably wrong,
though...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-07 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-06 20:00 performance delta after VFS i_mutex=>i_rwsem conversion Dave Hansen
2016-06-06 20:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-06 21:13 ` Waiman Long
2016-06-06 21:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-07 3:22 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2016-06-07 15:22 ` Waiman Long
2016-06-08 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-06-09 10:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-06-09 18:14 ` Dave Hansen
2016-06-09 20:10 ` Chen, Tim C
2016-06-06 21:15 ` Al Viro
2016-06-06 21:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-06 22:07 ` Al Viro
2016-06-06 23:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-06 23:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-07 0:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-07 0:40 ` Al Viro [this message]
2016-06-07 0:44 ` Al Viro
2016-06-07 0:58 ` Al Viro
2016-06-07 0:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-06-07 1:19 ` Al Viro
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=20160607004058.GH14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=walken@google.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 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).