From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@oracle.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] kernfs: Reduce contention around global per-fs kernfs_rwsem.
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 07:44:12 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YeG2bJtkbrue/hwZ@slm.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84861be0-519a-233d-9c6c-482f12e33328@oracle.com>
Hello,
On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 04:08:10AM +1100, Imran Khan wrote:
> I have made changes inline with your suggestion to synchronize
> addition/removal through hashed locks but so far I am not using tokens.
> I am currently testing these changes (so far no issues seen). Before
> floating next version for review I wanted to understand the reason
> behind need of tokens. Could you please elaborate a bit about what needs
> / may have to be recorded in tokens. Just one example will do. It would
> help me consolidate the next version of this change without overlooking
> something.
Oh, just sth to carry what needs to be done to unlock. If you didn't need
them and returning pointers to the locks was enough, that's fine too but if
double locking was necessary for e.g. removals, encapsulating it in a struct
may be neater.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-14 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-13 10:42 [PATCH v3 0/2] kernfs: use hashed mutex and spinlock in place of global ones Imran Khan
2022-01-13 10:42 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] " Imran Khan
2022-01-13 16:37 ` Tejun Heo
2022-01-13 10:42 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] kernfs: Reduce contention around global per-fs kernfs_rwsem Imran Khan
2022-01-13 10:58 ` Greg KH
2022-01-13 16:42 ` Tejun Heo
2022-01-14 17:08 ` Imran Khan
2022-01-14 17:44 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2022-02-02 15:10 ` Imran Khan
2022-01-25 2:55 ` [kernfs] 8652224976: WARNING:at_kernel/locking/rwsem.c:#up_write kernel test robot
2022-01-13 10:57 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] kernfs: use hashed mutex and spinlock in place of global ones Greg KH
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=YeG2bJtkbrue/hwZ@slm.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=imran.f.khan@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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
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).