Re: [PATCH v5 03/22] cachefiles: introduce on-demand read mode

[JeffleXu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 3/21/22 9:40 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 09:17:04PM +0800, Jeffle Xu wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CACHEFILES_ONDEMAND
>> +	struct xarray			reqs;		/* xarray of pending on-demand requests */
>> +	rwlock_t			reqs_lock;	/* Lock for reqs xarray */
> 
> Why do you have a separate rwlock when the xarray already has its own
> spinlock?  This is usually a really bad idea.

Hi,

Thanks for reviewing.

reqs_lock is also used to protect the check of cache->flags. Please
refer to patch 4 [1] of this patchset.

```
+	/*
+	 * Enqueue the pending request.
+	 *
+	 * Stop enqueuing the request when daemon is dying. So we need to
+	 * 1) check cache state, and 2) enqueue request if cache is alive.
+	 *
+	 * The above two ops need to be atomic as a whole. @reqs_lock is used
+	 * here to ensure that. Otherwise, request may be enqueued after xarray
+	 * has been flushed, in which case the orphan request will never be
+	 * completed and thus netfs will hang there forever.
+	 */
+	read_lock(&cache->reqs_lock);
+
+	/* recheck dead state under lock */
+	if (test_bit(CACHEFILES_DEAD, &cache->flags)) {
+		read_unlock(&cache->reqs_lock);
+		ret = -EIO;
+		goto out;
+	}
+
+	xa_lock(xa);
+	ret = __xa_alloc(xa, &id, req, xa_limit_32b, GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!ret)
+		__xa_set_mark(xa, id, CACHEFILES_REQ_NEW);
+	xa_unlock(xa);
+
+	read_unlock(&cache->reqs_lock);
```

It's mainly used to protect against the xarray flush.

Besides, IMHO read-write lock shall be more performance friendly, since
most cases are the read side.


[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/3/16/351

-- 
Thanks,
Jeffle