From: Hao Xu <[email protected]>
To: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
Dominique Martinet <[email protected]>,
Pavel Begunkov <[email protected]>,
Christian Brauner <[email protected]>,
Alexander Viro <[email protected]>,
Stefan Roesch <[email protected]>, Clay Harris <[email protected]>,
Dave Chinner <[email protected]>,
"Darrick J . Wong" <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
Wanpeng Li <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] xfs: add NOWAIT semantics for readdir
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 15:41:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On 8/28/23 04:44, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 09:28:26PM +0800, Hao Xu wrote:
>> +++ b/fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.c
>> @@ -2643,16 +2643,32 @@ xfs_da_read_buf(
>> struct xfs_buf_map map, *mapp = ↦
>> int nmap = 1;
>> int error;
>> + int buf_flags = 0;
>>
>> *bpp = NULL;
>> error = xfs_dabuf_map(dp, bno, flags, whichfork, &mapp, &nmap);
>> if (error || !nmap)
>> goto out_free;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * NOWAIT semantics mean we don't wait on the buffer lock nor do we
>> + * issue IO for this buffer if it is not already in memory. Caller will
>> + * retry. This will return -EAGAIN if the buffer is in memory and cannot
>> + * be locked, and no buffer and no error if it isn't in memory. We
>> + * translate both of those into a return state of -EAGAIN and *bpp =
>> + * NULL.
>> + */
>
> I would not include this comment.
No strong comment here, since this patch is mostly from Dave, it's
better if Dave can ack this.
>
>> + if (flags & XFS_DABUF_NOWAIT)
>> + buf_flags |= XBF_TRYLOCK | XBF_INCORE;
>> error = xfs_trans_read_buf_map(mp, tp, mp->m_ddev_targp, mapp, nmap, 0,
>> &bp, ops);
>
> what tsting did you do with this? Because you don't actually _use_
> buf_flags anywhere in this patch (presumably they should be the
> sixth argument to xfs_trans_read_buf_map() instead of 0). So I can only
> conclude that either you didn't test, or your testing was inadequate.
>
The tests I've done are listed in the cover-letter, this one is missed,
the tricky place is it's hard to get this kind of mistake since it runs
well without nowait logic...I'll fix it in next version.
>> if (error)
>> goto out_free;
>> + if (!bp) {
>> + ASSERT(flags & XFS_DABUF_NOWAIT);
>
> I don't think this ASSERT is appropriate.
>
>> @@ -391,10 +401,17 @@ xfs_dir2_leaf_getdents(
>> bp = NULL;
>> }
>>
>> - if (*lock_mode == 0)
>> - *lock_mode = xfs_ilock_data_map_shared(dp);
>> + if (*lock_mode == 0) {
>> + *lock_mode =
>> + xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_generic(dp,
>> + ctx->flags & DIR_CONTEXT_F_NOWAIT);
>> + if (!*lock_mode) {
>> + error = -EAGAIN;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>
> 'generic' doesn't seem like a great suffix to mean 'takes nowait flag'.
> And this is far too far indented.
>
> xfs_dir2_lock(dp, ctx, lock_mode);
>
> with:
>
> STATIC void xfs_dir2_lock(struct xfs_inode *dp, struct dir_context *ctx,
> unsigned int lock_mode)
> {
> if (*lock_mode)
> return;
> if (ctx->flags & DIR_CONTEXT_F_NOWAIT)
> return xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_nowait(dp);
> return xfs_ilock_data_map_shared(dp);
> }
>
> ... which I think you can use elsewhere in this patch (reformat it to
> XFS coding style, of course). And then you don't need
> xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_generic().
>
How about rename xfs_ilock_data_map_shared() to
xfs_ilock_data_map_block() and rename
xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_generic() to xfs_ilock_data_map_shared()?
STATIC void xfs_ilock_data_map_shared(struct xfs_inode *dp, struct
dir_context *ctx, unsigned int lock_mode)
{
if (*lock_mode)
return;
if (ctx->flags & DIR_CONTEXT_F_NOWAIT)
return xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_nowait(dp);
return xfs_ilock_data_map_shared_block(dp);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-29 7:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-27 13:28 [PATCH v6 00/11] io_uring getdents Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 01/11] fs: split off vfs_getdents function of getdents64 syscall Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 02/11] xfs: add NOWAIT semantics for readdir Hao Xu
2023-08-27 20:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-29 7:41 ` Hao Xu [this message]
2023-08-29 13:05 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-04 1:02 ` Dave Chinner
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 03/11] vfs: add nowait flag for struct dir_context Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 04/11] vfs: add a vfs helper for io_uring file pos lock Hao Xu
2023-08-27 20:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 05/11] vfs: add file_pos_unlock() for io_uring usage Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 06/11] vfs: add a nowait parameter for touch_atime() Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 07/11] vfs: add nowait parameter for file_accessed() Hao Xu
2023-08-27 21:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-29 7:46 ` Hao Xu
2023-08-29 11:53 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-30 6:11 ` Hao Xu
2023-09-03 22:30 ` Dave Chinner
2023-09-08 0:29 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-09-10 22:01 ` Dave Chinner
2023-09-04 9:51 ` Christian Brauner
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 08/11] vfs: move file_accessed() to the beginning of iterate_dir() Hao Xu
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 09/11] vfs: error out -EAGAIN if atime needs to be updated Hao Xu
2023-08-27 20:51 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 10/11] vfs: trylock inode->i_rwsem in iterate_dir() to support nowait Hao Xu
2023-09-04 9:37 ` Christian Brauner
2023-08-27 13:28 ` [PATCH 11/11] io_uring: add support for getdents Hao Xu
2023-09-04 9:57 ` [PATCH v6 00/11] io_uring getdents Christian Brauner
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 \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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