[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <133078.1680013145@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 15:19:05 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Jia Zhu <zhujia.zj@...edance.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, linux-cachefs@...hat.com,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Xin Yin <yinxin.x@...edance.com>,
Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/5] cachefiles: narrow the scope of triggering EPOLLIN events in ondemand mode
Jia Zhu <zhujia.zj@...edance.com> wrote:
> + if (!xa_empty(xa)) {
> + xa_lock(xa);
> + xa_for_each_marked(xa, index, req, CACHEFILES_REQ_NEW) {
> + if (!cachefiles_ondemand_is_reopening_read(req)) {
> + mask |= EPOLLIN;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + xa_unlock(xa);
> + }
I wonder if there's a more efficient way to do this. I guess it depends on
how many reqs you expect to get in a queue. It might be worth taking the
rcu_read_lock before calling xa_lock() and holding it over the whole loop.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists