Re: [patch 05/27] fs: brlock vfsmount_lock

[Al Viro]

On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:20:25AM +1000, npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote:

[overall: sane idea, but...]

> +void vfsmount_read_lock(void)
> +{
> +	spinlock_t *lock;
> +
> +	lock = &get_cpu_var(vfsmount_lock);
> +	spin_lock(lock);
> +}
> +
> +void vfsmount_read_unlock(void)
> +{
> +	spinlock_t *lock;
> +
> +	lock = &__get_cpu_var(vfsmount_lock);
> +	spin_unlock(lock);
> +	put_cpu_var(vfsmount_lock);
> +}

These might be hot enough to be worth inlining, at least in fs/namei.c
users.  Or not - really needs testing.

> @@ -68,9 +113,9 @@ static int mnt_alloc_id(struct vfsmount
>  
>  retry:
>  	ida_pre_get(&mnt_id_ida, GFP_KERNEL);
> -	spin_lock(&vfsmount_lock);
> +	vfsmount_write_lock();
>  	res = ida_get_new(&mnt_id_ida, &mnt->mnt_id);
> -	spin_unlock(&vfsmount_lock);
> +	vfsmount_write_unlock();

Yuck.  _Really_ an overkill here.

>  static void mnt_free_id(struct vfsmount *mnt)
>  {
> -	spin_lock(&vfsmount_lock);
> +	vfsmount_write_lock();
>  	ida_remove(&mnt_id_ida, mnt->mnt_id);
> -	spin_unlock(&vfsmount_lock);
> +	vfsmount_write_unlock();
>  }

Ditto.

Missing: description of when we need it for read/when we need it for write.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/