[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120507235647.GH21152@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 16:56:47 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
Louis Rilling <louis.rilling@...labs.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Speed up deactivate_super for non-modular
filesystems
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:17:06PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 02:51:08PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > /proc and similar non-modular filesystems do not need a rcu_barrier
> > in deactivate_locked_super. Being non-modular there is no danger
> > of the rcu callback running after the module is unloaded.
>
> There's more than just a module unload there, though - actual freeing
> struct super_block also happens past that rcu_barrier()...
Is there anything in there for which synchronous operation is required?
If not, one approach would be to drop the rcu_barrier() calls to a
workqueue or something similar.
Thanx, Paul
--
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