[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1277366290.1875.891.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 09:58:10 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: npiggin@...e.de
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 16/52] fs: dcache RCU for multi-step operaitons
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 13:02 +1000, npiggin@...e.de wrote:
> plain text document attachment (fs-dcache_lock-multi-step.patch)
> The remaining usages for dcache_lock is to allow atomic, multi-step read-side
> operations over the directory tree by excluding modifications to the tree.
> Also, to walk in the leaf->root direction in the tree where we don't have
> a natural d_lock ordering.
>
> This could be accomplished by taking every d_lock, but this would mean a
> huge number of locks and actually gets very tricky.
>
> Solve this instead by using the rename seqlock for multi-step read-side
> operations. Insert operations are not serialised. Delete operations are
> tricky when walking up the directory our parent might have been deleted
> when dropping locks so also need to check and retry for that.
>
> XXX: hmm, we could of course just take the rename lock if there is any worry
> about livelock. Most of these are slow paths.
Ah, does this address John's issue?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists