Re: [PATCH v2 10/14] locks: turn the blocked_list into a hashtable
From: J. Bruce Fields
Date: Thu Jun 13 2013 - 10:50:43 EST
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:09:04AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Break up the blocked_list into a hashtable, using the fl_owner as a key.
> This speeds up searching the hash chains, which is especially significant
> for deadlock detection.
>
> Note that the initial implementation assumes that hashing on fl_owner is
> sufficient. In most cases it should be, with the notable exception being
> server-side lockd, which compares ownership using a tuple of the
> nlm_host and the pid sent in the lock request. So, this may degrade to a
> single hash bucket when you only have a single NFS client. That will be
> addressed in a later patch.
>
> The careful observer may note that this patch leaves the file_lock_list
> alone. There's much less of a case for turning the file_lock_list into a
> hashtable. The only user of that list is the code that generates
> /proc/locks, and it always walks the entire list.
Makes sense to me, ACK to this and the previous patch.--b.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/locks.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index 28959bc..76fb7af 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
> #include <linux/time.h>
> #include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> #include <linux/pid_namespace.h>
> +#include <linux/hashtable.h>
>
> #include <asm/uaccess.h>
>
> @@ -153,10 +154,19 @@ int lease_break_time = 45;
> #define for_each_lock(inode, lockp) \
> for (lockp = &inode->i_flock; *lockp != NULL; lockp = &(*lockp)->fl_next)
>
> +/*
> + * By breaking up the blocked locks list into a hashtable, we speed up the
> + * deadlock detection.
> + *
> + * FIXME: make this value scale via some heuristic?
> + */
> +#define BLOCKED_HASH_BITS 7
> +
> +static DEFINE_HASHTABLE(blocked_hash, BLOCKED_HASH_BITS);
> +
> static HLIST_HEAD(file_lock_list);
> -static HLIST_HEAD(blocked_list);
>
> -/* Protects the two list heads above */
> +/* Protects the file_lock_list and the blocked_hash */
> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(file_lock_lock);
>
> static struct kmem_cache *filelock_cache __read_mostly;
> @@ -475,13 +485,13 @@ static int posix_same_owner(struct file_lock *fl1, struct file_lock *fl2)
> static inline void
> locks_insert_global_blocked(struct file_lock *waiter)
> {
> - hlist_add_head(&waiter->fl_link, &blocked_list);
> + hash_add(blocked_hash, &waiter->fl_link, (unsigned long)waiter->fl_owner);
> }
>
> static inline void
> __locks_delete_global_blocked(struct file_lock *waiter)
> {
> - hlist_del_init(&waiter->fl_link);
> + hash_del(&waiter->fl_link);
> }
>
> static inline void
> @@ -729,7 +739,7 @@ static struct file_lock *what_owner_is_waiting_for(struct file_lock *block_fl)
> {
> struct file_lock *fl;
>
> - hlist_for_each_entry(fl, &blocked_list, fl_link) {
> + hash_for_each_possible(blocked_hash, fl, fl_link, (unsigned long)block_fl->fl_owner) {
> if (posix_same_owner(fl, block_fl))
> return fl->fl_next;
> }
> @@ -865,7 +875,7 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str
> /*
> * New lock request. Walk all POSIX locks and look for conflicts. If
> * there are any, either return error or put the request on the
> - * blocker's list of waiters and the global blocked_list.
> + * blocker's list of waiters and the global blocked_hash.
> */
> if (request->fl_type != F_UNLCK) {
> for_each_lock(inode, before) {
> @@ -2284,13 +2294,14 @@ static void lock_get_status(struct seq_file *f, struct file_lock *fl,
>
> static int locks_show(struct seq_file *f, void *v)
> {
> + int bkt;
> struct file_lock *fl, *bfl;
>
> fl = hlist_entry(v, struct file_lock, fl_link);
>
> lock_get_status(f, fl, *((loff_t *)f->private), "");
>
> - hlist_for_each_entry(bfl, &blocked_list, fl_link) {
> + hash_for_each(blocked_hash, bkt, bfl, fl_link) {
> if (bfl->fl_next == fl)
> lock_get_status(f, bfl, *((loff_t *)f->private), " ->");
> }
> --
> 1.7.1
>
--
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/