[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1B808CC0-49C6-4AF6-B7E2-0772A71DB490@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2023 09:45:37 -0500
From: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>
To: Chengen Du <chengen.du@...onical.com>
Cc: trond.myklebust@...merspace.com, anna@...nel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: Correct timing for assigning access cache timestamp
On 8 Mar 2023, at 3:03, Chengen Du wrote:
> When the user's login time is newer than the cache's timestamp,
> the original entry in the RB-tree will be replaced by a new entry.
> Currently, the timestamp is only set if the entry is not found in
> the RB-tree, which can cause the timestamp to be undefined when
> the entry exists. This may result in a significant increase in
> ACCESS operations if the timestamp is set to zero.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chengen Du <chengen.du@...onical.com>
> ---
> fs/nfs/dir.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nfs/dir.c b/fs/nfs/dir.c
> index a41c3ee4549c..6fbcbb8d6587 100644
> --- a/fs/nfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/nfs/dir.c
> @@ -3089,7 +3089,6 @@ static void nfs_access_add_rbtree(struct inode *inode,
> else
> goto found;
> }
> - set->timestamp = ktime_get_ns();
> rb_link_node(&set->rb_node, parent, p);
> rb_insert_color(&set->rb_node, root_node);
> list_add_tail(&set->lru, &nfsi->access_cache_entry_lru);
> @@ -3114,6 +3113,7 @@ void nfs_access_add_cache(struct inode *inode, struct nfs_access_entry *set,
> cache->fsgid = cred->fsgid;
> cache->group_info = get_group_info(cred->group_info);
> cache->mask = set->mask;
> + cache->timestamp = ktime_get_ns();
>
> /* The above field assignments must be visible
> * before this item appears on the lru. We cannot easily
> --
> 2.37.2
Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists