[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210315124644.GU2577561@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 12:46:44 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] vfs: Use an xarray instead of inserted
bookmarks to scan mount list
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:07:39PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
>
> Hi Al, Miklós,
>
> Can we consider replacing the "insert cursor" approach we're currently
> using for proc files to scan the current namespace's mount list[1] with
> something that uses an xarray of mounts indexed by mnt_id?
>
> This has some advantages:
>
> (1) It's simpler. We don't need to insert dummy mount objects as
> bookmarks into the mount list and code that's walking the list doesn't
> have to carefully step over them.
>
> (2) We can use the file position to represent the mnt_id and can jump to
> it directly - ie. using seek() to jump to a mount object by its ID.
>
> (3) It might make it easier to use RCU in future to dump mount entries
> rather than having to take namespace_sem. xarray provides for the
> possibility of tagging entries to say that they're viewable to avoid
> dumping incomplete mount objects.
Usually one fully constructs the object, then inserts it into the XArray.
> But there are a number of disadvantages:
>
> (1) We have to allocate memory to maintain the xarray, which becomes more
> of a problem as mnt_id values get scattered.
mnt_id values don't seem to get particularly scattered. They're allocated
using an IDA, so they stay small (unlike someone using idr_alloc_cyclic
;-).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists