| Message ID | 20200101105248.25304-1-riteshh@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems | expand |
Ritesh - I just loaded your patch on top of 5.5-rc4 and it looks fine to me and xfstests :-) ... I pointed ftrace at the orangefs function you modified while xfstests was running, and it got called about a jillion times... -Mike On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 5:53 AM Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > Al, any comments? > Resending this after adding Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags. > > > From previous version:- > Matthew Wilcox in [1] suggested that it will be a good idea > to define some missing API instead of directly using i_rwsem in > filesystems drivers for lock/unlock/downgrade purposes. > > This patch does that work. No functionality change in this patch. > > After this there are only lockdep class of APIs at certain places > in filesystems which are directly using i_rwsem and second is XFS, > but it seems to be anyway defining it's own xfs_ilock/iunlock set > of APIs and 'iolock' naming convention for this lock. > > [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-ext4/msg68689.html > > Ritesh Harjani (1): > fs: Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems > > fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 2 +- > fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 4 ++-- > fs/ceph/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > fs/nfs/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > fs/orangefs/file.c | 4 ++-- > fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 2 +- > fs/readdir.c | 4 ++-- > include/linux/fs.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.21.0 >
On 1/3/20 2:31 AM, Mike Marshall wrote: > Ritesh - > > I just loaded your patch on top of 5.5-rc4 and it looks fine to me > and xfstests :-) ... I pointed ftrace at the orangefs function you > modified while xfstests was running, and it got called about a > jillion times... Thanks Mike for testing this. Shall I add your Tested-by? -ritesh > > -Mike > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 5:53 AM Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> Al, any comments? >> Resending this after adding Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags. >> >> >> From previous version:- >> Matthew Wilcox in [1] suggested that it will be a good idea >> to define some missing API instead of directly using i_rwsem in >> filesystems drivers for lock/unlock/downgrade purposes. >> >> This patch does that work. No functionality change in this patch. >> >> After this there are only lockdep class of APIs at certain places >> in filesystems which are directly using i_rwsem and second is XFS, >> but it seems to be anyway defining it's own xfs_ilock/iunlock set >> of APIs and 'iolock' naming convention for this lock. >> >> [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-ext4/msg68689.html >> >> Ritesh Harjani (1): >> fs: Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems >> >> fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 2 +- >> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 4 ++-- >> fs/ceph/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ >> fs/nfs/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ >> fs/orangefs/file.c | 4 ++-- >> fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 2 +- >> fs/readdir.c | 4 ++-- >> include/linux/fs.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.21.0 >>
Yes, please do. -Mike On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:38 AM Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > On 1/3/20 2:31 AM, Mike Marshall wrote: > > Ritesh - > > > > I just loaded your patch on top of 5.5-rc4 and it looks fine to me > > and xfstests :-) ... I pointed ftrace at the orangefs function you > > modified while xfstests was running, and it got called about a > > jillion times... > > Thanks Mike for testing this. Shall I add your Tested-by? > > -ritesh > > > > > > -Mike > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 5:53 AM Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > >> > >> Al, any comments? > >> Resending this after adding Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags. > >> > >> > >> From previous version:- > >> Matthew Wilcox in [1] suggested that it will be a good idea > >> to define some missing API instead of directly using i_rwsem in > >> filesystems drivers for lock/unlock/downgrade purposes. > >> > >> This patch does that work. No functionality change in this patch. > >> > >> After this there are only lockdep class of APIs at certain places > >> in filesystems which are directly using i_rwsem and second is XFS, > >> but it seems to be anyway defining it's own xfs_ilock/iunlock set > >> of APIs and 'iolock' naming convention for this lock. > >> > >> [1]: https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-ext4/msg68689.html > >> > >> Ritesh Harjani (1): > >> fs: Use inode_lock/unlock class of provided APIs in filesystems > >> > >> fs/btrfs/delayed-inode.c | 2 +- > >> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 4 ++-- > >> fs/ceph/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > >> fs/nfs/io.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > >> fs/orangefs/file.c | 4 ++-- > >> fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 2 +- > >> fs/readdir.c | 4 ++-- > >> include/linux/fs.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 8 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > >> > >> -- > >> 2.21.0 > >> >
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 04:22:47PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote: > Al, any comments? > Resending this after adding Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags. .... argh. My apologies - that got fallen through the cracks. Could you rebase and resend it?
On 5/1/20 10:07 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 04:22:47PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote: >> Al, any comments? >> Resending this after adding Reviewed-by/Acked-by tags. > > .... argh. My apologies - that got fallen through the cracks. > Could you rebase and resend it? > Np. Sure, will rebase and resend. -ritesh